Hockey: Trade deadline highlights communication between GM and coach

Making moves at the Trade Deadline is an entirely different challenge compared to making them during the offseason. In the summer, teams exist mostly on paper. While players come with reputations and past performances, there is no current-season context to measure them against. By the time the Trade Deadline arrives, however, teams have played over half the season, allowing them to clearly identify their strengths, weaknesses, and specific needs relative to their competition.

At this stage, front offices are no longer speculating about what might help their team; they know with certainty. They might conclude, “We need a penalty killer,” or “We need a skilled player to complement our second-line center,” or “We need a second-pairing defenseman and secondary scoring.” The difference between the offseason and the Deadline is the depth of knowledge teams have about their own needs and the broader league landscape.

In some cases, coaches were fortunate to also serve as the general manager. One coach’s most memorable deadline moves happened when he was coach/GM of a team in the ECHL during the 1999-2000 season. That year, they identified a need for a power-play specialist with experience and presence. The assistant coach — now a pro scout for the Edmonton Oilers—was instrumental in pinpointing the right player for them: Aaron Boh. He was a unique personality, known for his tattoos, earrings, and vibrant hair, and even worked as a DJ at night. Despite his eccentricities, he was a phenomenal talent.

When they made the trade for Boh, a friend immediately called to question the move. “What are you doing? You’ve got a good thing going there, and this guy could disrupt the chemistry.” He acknowledged the risk but believed the team identity was strong enough to integrate him without issue. He wouldn’t have taken that risk in training camp when our identity was still forming, but by the Deadline, he was confident. The gamble paid off—Boh contributed 17 points in 15 regular-season games and 11 points in 15 playoff games. They won the Kelly Cup that year, and he was an absolute pleasure to coach.

Later, when he was coaching in the AHL (2000-05), he experienced the Trade Deadline from a different angle. The parent club, the St. Louis Blues, was competitive at the NHL level. He’d get calls from GM Larry Pleau telling him they had to send one of our promising young players elsewhere in exchange for a veteran to strengthen their playoff push. When your team is contending, you’re often sacrificing prospects in favor of experienced players who can provide an immediate impact.

Fast forward to his time as a pro scout in the NHL in 2010-11, and he saw another aspect of the process: working under tight salary cap constraints. That season, the GM gave a clear directive: find two impact players who fit within a limited budget. After extensive scouting and internal discussions, thry acquired Chris Higgins from Florida and Maxim Lapierre from Anaheim, just barely staying under the cap. Both players played crucial roles in helping Vancouver reach Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Final. It was a remarkable display of strategic Deadline maneuvering by the GM and the director of pro scouting, who now holds the same position with the Montreal Canadiens.

In the NHL, the Trade Deadline is a nerve-wracking period for everyone involved, from coaches to players to front office staff. General managers spend hours in their offices or on the phone, weighing different trade scenarios. The bigger the trade, the greater the pressure to ensure it works.

One of the most valuable but often overlooked aspects of trades is familiarity. Teams always seek insight into a player’s personality, mindset, and commitment level. Evaluating talent is relatively straightforward, but understanding intangibles—like a player’s competitive spirit, locker room presence, and adaptability—requires significant behind-the-scenes work. If someone on the management team has firsthand experience with the player, the likelihood of making the trade increases. In some cases, familiarity even justifies paying a premium.

A great example is the Florida Panthers’ recent acquisition of defenseman Seth Jones from the Chicago Blackhawks. Panthers GM Bill Zito knew Jones from their time together in the Columbus Blue Jackets organization. That prior relationship gave Zito confidence in how Jones would fit into Florida’s system and locker room, easing the transition and minimizing risk.

Conversely, when acquiring a player without prior familiarity, coaches and management have a host of concerns. How will he mesh with his new teammates? How quickly will he adjust to his new role? Is he in the right mindset to embrace a fresh start? These uncertainties add layers of complexity to the trade process. Teams often make discreet inquiries before finalizing a deal, reaching out to trusted sources who know the player well. Even after the trade, they might call the coach of the player’s former team to gain additional insight.

Once the Trade deadline passes, there’s an immediate shift in focus. Players and staff can finally exhale. Leading up to the Deadline, speculation runs rampant, and everyone wonders how their team might change. The moment the 3 p.m. deadline hits, teams regroup with a sense of finality. The roster is set, and it’s time to push forward with the group they have. The next time the players walk into the locker room, the message is clear: “This is our team. Let’s go after it.”

Reno Silva/MS