Wednesday Mailbag: January 28, 2026

This mailbag stems from a particularly compelling question I received about Dean Letourneau — one that felt worth unpacking in a broader conversation. With that in mind, I opened the floor for your questions.

A brief note before we begin: several questions were originally quite lengthy, so they’ve been streamlined for clarity and flow.

Mike asks: Can you talk about the pros and cons of Dean Letourneau or players like him making the jump to the AHL? Even in a season where they might expect him to contribute to the National club, is there anything that makes you think he’d benefit (or not) by being pushed aggressively to Providence?

Answer: I never fault a player for believing he’s ready to make the jump to the pro ranks, but in Letourneau’s case, it doesn’t appear that he is the type of person to force the issue. By all indications, he knows there’s still development ahead.

As I’ve mentioned before, over the holidays my friend Court Lalonde happened to walk into an Ottawa rink where Letourneau was training. Working with him was Ottawa Senators skating coach Shelley Kettles. Court spoke with her, and she noted that she’s put together a full offseason skating program for him, along with several smaller areas of refinement. She also told Court that Letourneau is expected to return to Boston College.

While his original plan was to turn pro after his sophomore season, it’s important to remember that next year was supposed to be that sophomore year. What’s also clear is that Letourneau is a relentless worker — the type who will attack whatever development plan is put in front of him. So, while it wouldn’t shock me if he pushed his way into turning pro sooner, the expectation right now is that he’ll be back at BC.

Rushing a prospect rarely serves the player or the organization. We’ve seen cases like Jakob Forsbacka‑Karlsson, who pushed to turn pro while the Bruins preferred a longer runway — and the transition never fully materialized. Conversely, Dans Locmelis took the same route and has stepped in without missing a beat.

Denis asks: First off appreciate all of the info. You name it you have a pulse on the Bruins.

At this point and time, the Bruins are overachieving in my mind and frankly I am happy the Rasmus Anderson trade did not materialize. Everyone seems to say the 2026 draft is above average. What can the bruins draft in the mid-teens to low 20’s – 2 picks or should they trade for a player in it’s prime – Robert Thomas as an example.

Answer: I typically start tracking each draft class a year out, and the 2026 group has impressed me so far — though I wouldn’t label it above average overall. I actually prefer the top‑10 talent in 2025, but beyond that range, 2026 offers more depth and projects better into the later rounds.

From the Bruins’ perspective, there should be a legitimate opportunity to land a top‑four, right‑shot defenseman in that window. That said, when the possibility of acquiring a bona fide, cost‑controlled top‑line center is on the table, it has to be treated as a serious consideration.

The complication is that it’s never just the picks. A player like Thomas would command a significant return, and without knowing the full scope of the package, it’s tough to say definitively whether the move makes sense.

Jeff asks: Hi Dom, keenest insight in Hockey as always! Two questions? Can you give your take on Sweeney’s calculus by weighting these possible factors in his willingness to pay the price for Rasmus Andersson:

1) His demonstrated durability suggests he might not slow down considerably toward the end of a 6-year deal. 2) His minutes make the B’s big three defense stronger for playoffs, 3) Sweeney actually sees a potential playoff run this year. 4) The Toronto and B’s win streaks lessen likelihood of drafting an elite RHD.

Second one: While way premature, given D. Letourneau’s dogged determination, if he improves his skating slightly, puts on another 15lbs of muscle, and matures two ways, how likely is it he achieves a top line ceiling?

Answer:

Thank you, Jeff. While I agree that many of the factors you mentioned likely influenced the Bruins’ pursuit of Andersson, I don’t believe the positioning of their own pick — or Toronto’s — was a major driver. Don Sweeney identified a player who could help immediately and in the near future, which suggests the organization remains committed to its original long‑term plan.

That approach is encouraging, not only in their decision to walk away once an extension wasn’t possible, but also for whatever moves they consider as the deadline approaches. Sweeney and the front office have to balance the present with the bigger picture, and it’s clear they’re keeping that future focus intact.

I appreciate you circling back on Letourneau — it’s an angle that doesn’t get nearly enough attention. You’re right that there’s still development ahead, but the tools and drive to become a top‑line contributor are clearly there. The real intrigue now is positional: does he project long‑term on the wing or down the middle? And how might that align with James Hagens — could we see Hagens on the flank with Letourneau anchoring the line? There’s no shortage of possibilities, and fortunately, time is working in everyone’s favor.

Joe asks: I made it to my first Providence game a few weeks ago and a few things stood out to me that I have questions about.

1) Georgii Merkulov had a great shot, but he held on to the puck too long and he was much smaller in person than I imagined. 2) I didn’t notice Fabian Lysell at all during the game except for the few times he had the puck. 3) Dans Locmelis – So impressed by him. Effort was there for the entire game. 4) Matthew Poitras played really well. Always notice him on the ice. More confident in face-offs and won 4/5. Surprised to see him net front so much, which seems to be a change.

Based on what I observed, I’m wondering are those the things still holding Merk and Lysell back? How long will Locmelis be in Providence and do you see him more as a wing than a center? Why is the focus for Poitras to be net front now? He was getting cross checked quite a bit. Part of the plan to make him more aggressive/chippy?

Answer: To start, there are additional Poitras questions ahead, so I’ll address that portion in more detail later. Regarding Merkulov, he’s been overtaken on the depth chart by multiple players, and it’s fair to question whether the Bruins will extend him a contract at all. As for Lysell, he remains a high‑variance player — electric on some nights, invisible on others. That said, there has been meaningful progress in his game, and I’m not convinced he’s a player you walk away from just yet.

Locmelis is a player I’ve been highlighting since the day he was drafted, and for good reason. I’ve long challenged fans to find another prospect his age with a deeper résumé of international experience — more than 70 games for his country at that stage is almost unheard of. I’ve always believed in his trajectory, and projecting him forward, his NHL future looks strongest on the wing.

Elizabeth asks: It seems likely that Poitras is going to be moved by the deadline as part of a package deal for a 1C or RHD. Are there teams that would put him on their roster now, so he could continue to develop with NHL minutes? Could Vancouver use him immediately if the Bruins trade for Hronek? Calgary maybe if they trade for Whitecloud? Are there others?

I would hate to see Poitras go, but I just don’t think the Bruins have space for him or that he’s in their long-term plans. However, would love to see him succeed somewhere else.

Answer: My apologies, Elizabeth, but I’m not going to speculate on potential trade asks. What one organization considers a valuable asset from one team can vary significantly from what they value from another organization, so any projection would be purely guesswork.

There’s been no shortage of questions about Poitras, so let’s address it directly: the Bruins’ belief in him hasn’t wavered. The narrative that he was beaten out for a roster spot by Fraser Minten is only partially accurate. As I noted extensively last offseason, the situation was more nuanced than a simple head‑to‑head battle.

The third‑line center job was essentially Minten’s to lose. His mature, 200‑foot game made him the more natural fit for that role. Poitras, meanwhile, was effectively competing with Pavel Zacha and Casey Mittelstadt — a battle he was never realistically positioned to win. That’s why Minten held a spot in my projected lineup all summer, while Poitras did not.

Poitras was assigned to Providence with a clear development checklist, and the returns have been noticeable for anyone watching him closely — and exclusively — shift to shift. His play from the neutral zone back into his own end has taken a significant step forward compared to what we saw at the NHL level. He’s also made gains in the finer details: stronger on draws, more competitive in board battles, and far more willing to engage in the hard areas. Even his ability to absorb — or avoid — the heavy contact that fans often pointed to has improved.

The downside, of course, is that while he’s been focused on rounding out the rest of his game, his offensive production has dipped. The challenge now is finding the balance — blending the defensive growth with the creativity and pace that make him effective. There’s been an uptick over his last handful of games, but the trajectory needs to continue, especially with Poitras set to require waivers to return to Providence next season. The Bruins can’t afford to lose him for nothing, which means a decision is coming sooner than they’d prefer.

Sam asks:

I was really surprised to see after you pointed it out, that basically none of the forwards on Providence are signed for next year. Is that unusual? When would you expect the Bruins to begin making decisions and signing them?

The other thing I wanted to ask, is if for example, Poitras is traded as an RFA, would the new team want him signed before completing the transaction or would the new team want to be the ones to offer him his next contract?

Answer: It’s common for NHL organizations to have a few expiring contracts on their AHL roster, but the volume Boston is dealing with is certainly atypical. There’s no urgency to get those contracts finalized, and my expectation is that most — if not all — will be addressed in the offseason.

To your second question, it’s rare — if not unprecedented — for a team to trade for an RFA while insisting on an extension before finalizing the deal. As a restricted free agent without arbitration rights, the leverage sits entirely with the team, whether that’s Boston or a potential acquiring club. And given Poitras’ current profile, it’s not as though he’s positioned to command a major payday that would force a team’s hand in negotiations.

Whaler asks: If the Bruins had not drafted Dean Letourneau, do you believe they would have drafted McQueen instead of Hagens?

Thank you for your insights

Answer: I’ll make this one quick: Absolutely not.

Mark asks: Do GM’s only look at numbers when assessing a player? With the trade rumors last weekend, other than the Flames fan base who seemed excited to get him, I saw lots of comments that Poitras was no longer a good player etc. because his numbers had dropped off so much this year. I think that’s because Mougenel doesn’t seem to have him focusing on offense, but defense and becoming more aggressive and antagonizing? Do GMs/scout realize this and that Poitras hasn’t lost his playmaking skills all of a sudden?

– Lohrei seems to be a perfect match for the Sharks with his defensive style. Could you see him ending up there at the trade deadline?

Answer: I’ve already touched on Poitras’ effectiveness in the AHL. But to add, absolutely every NHL team knows what’s going on. They have pro scouts out in arenas every night and they have a book on every team’s prospects.

When it comes to Mason Lohrei, I’m not going to wade into hypothetical trades or projected destinations. In my Sunday Summaries, I highlight the conflicting reports already circulating on a weekly basis just to show how far-fetched some can be, and I have no interest in adding to that noise. If there’s ever something substantive — real discussions or actual movement — I’ll report it. But drawing up trade proposals isn’t what I do, and it’s not something I’m looking to put into the mix.

My apologies, Mark, if that’s not the answer you were hoping for, but there’s already plenty of speculation out there, and I don’t think anyone benefits from me adding to it.

Mark asks: Hey Dom I realized I had one more question sort of related to the Dean one but also more in a broad sense.

Why don’t the Bruins promote higher caliber prospects for shorter stints in the NHL? If a prospect has consistently been playing well or the right way in the AHL, why not give them the random 2-3 games instead of putting a Viel/Eyssimont in?

Answer: A lot of it stems from the Bruins constantly operating at the cap, the lack of available spots within the 23‑man roster limit, and the realities of waivers. Jeffrey Viel and Michael Eyssimont aren’t ideal comparisons, as they were essentially parked on the ninth floor. And you could certainly argue that Boston created some of these constraints themselves — you wouldn’t get much pushback from me on that.

At the end of the day, hockey is a business. We don’t have to like that reality, but it drives every decision — including roster moves. The business side always comes first.

Eugene asks: Dom what your thoughts for after the break coming to the trade deadline buyers or Sellers or both? Any names targets?

What players do the Bruins sign from the college ranks. If they add a goalie who might be their target?

Answer: The trade deadline is still a long way off, so it makes sense to evaluate where they stand closer to that point before determining what moves — if any — make sense.

As for your second question, you may have missed this article I wrote.

Andy asks: I count 7 guys who project as #2-3 centers over the next 5 years. Seems to me that you can really only keep 2-4 long term. This seems like a position of depth that you can use in a trade for a 1C or 2RHD. Yet whenever I listen to podcasts everyone seems hesitant to trade any of them which I get. Which of these would you trade? Would Zacha/Minten + Lohrei + 2026/2027 1st + 2nd + Poitras/Lysell/Merkulov be enough to get you a Robert Thomas/Elias Pettersson? How far off am I? Zacha would be my preference to trade given his age and need of a new contract in a year or two but I assume teams want to get younger so Minten/Hagens might be much more attractive.

Answer: Thanks, Andy. As I mentioned earlier, I’m not diving into speculative trades, but here’s what I will say: Don Sweeney and his staff always do their homework. They’re not hesitant to shift players to the wing, and if someone earns a roster spot, they’ll make the room. More importantly, if they believe a move genuinely improves the team, they won’t hesitate to act. Personally, I’m more interested in watching how their approach evolves than in guessing months out from the deadline. As we get closer, I’ll certainly share my thoughts on what I believe they should consider.

Adam Asks: Hi Dom. What’s the deal with Cole Spicer? He seems productive when he plays, but he never plays.

Answer: You’re right, Adam — when he’s in the lineup, he produces. But Spicer’s situation has been well‑documented: the academic hurdles, the concussion history, and now a new layer of uncertainty with the team staying tight‑lipped about his current status. There’s clearly more to the story than what’s being shared publicly.

Gina asks: I’ve seen articles singing the praises of Marco Sturm and how great he’s been at getting the younger players like Minten and Marat Khusnutdinov to play to their potential. For starters, not stapling them to the bench when they’ve mistake has been a refreshing change.

Anyway, keeping that in mind, what would you do with the 2nd Line at the deadline? Assuming the Bruins keep Zacha, would you move Mittelstadt and Arvidsson as they aren’t long-term solutions so you can bring up Poitras? Give Sturm a chance to work with him longer and see if he could be your 2C? If not, would you keep that line together for a playoff push instead?

Answer: Thanks, Gina. It’s simply too early to map out what the Bruins should or shouldn’t do at the deadline. If they’re in the thick of a playoff push, it’s hard to envision them moving anyone out of the lineup. Maybe someone like Viktor Arvidsson becomes a conversation, but my sense is they’d prioritize an established option over a player who still needs development. As always, I’ll wait to see where things stand as the deadline approaches before weighing in on what I think makes sense.

Ben asks:  Wondering if you believe the Bruins should trade for a 1C such as Thomas now or hope that in 2/3 years that one of their younger prospects like Hagens can fill that role, though he we aren’t sure yet how he will translate to the NHL. Though they are still missing a piece or two, I would make that trade no matter the cost to give the Bruins core the best chance to win over the next few years.

Answer: Ben, like any trade, it ultimately comes down to acquisition cost, the incoming cap hit, and a range of other variables. That said, no NHL general manager can operate with a ‘whatever it takes’ mindset. You have to weigh the long‑term health of the franchise — not just the next two or three years, but the bigger picture.

Zach asks: I like Ryan Mougenel, but do you think it’s time for a new coach in Providence? I know the team has an amazing record, he’s been named to the all-star team etc., but it seems that none of the young forwards are improving enough to get a call up – not sure if that’s due to roster space or skill?

Answer: Fans sometimes overlook that Mougenel is juggling two mandates: development and winning — with the latter carrying the heavier weight. And the point I’ve made for some time still stands: the Bruins have Mike Dunham overseeing goaltender development, Adam McQuaid working with the skaters, and now Zdeno Chara adding his expertise on the back end (Both former defensemen). But where’s the dedicated voice focused on developing the forwards?

That’s the first issue the Bruins need to correct.

Andrew asks: Can you explain what happens with the Leafs pick if Ottawa finishes fifth and Toronto finishes sixth? Is it the protected and the Bruins pick moves onto next year or 2028? Also, I haven’t seen you on HF Boards in some time. Hoping your health is good.

Answer: There’s nothing in the NHL by‑laws or the CBA that specifically outlines procedures for forfeited draft picks. However, there is precedent. In the 2021 Draft, Arizona forfeited the 11th overall selection — a situation that mirrors what Ottawa is facing this season.

Just as we saw with Arizona, Ottawa will be excluded from the draft lottery and locked into the fifth pick. The remaining 15 non‑playoff teams will participate and be slotted one through fifteen, but with Ottawa locked into fifth spot, the fifth‑place team slides to sixth, the sixth‑place team to seventh, and so on. In that scenario, the only path for the Maple Leafs to climb into the top five would be to win the lottery outright.

As for my health, everything is fine. I’ve got three grandkids — with a fourth arriving in a couple of months — and they keep me plenty busy. I haven’t posted on HF in five or six months. Much like here, I tried to answer every question that came my way, until one day someone took issue with a response and fired back with something rude and unnecessary. I don’t need that, and I decided that the hour I spent there each day was far better spent with the kids.