Powers: Could Blackhawks pursue Sabres defenseman Bowen Byram? What I’m hearing

All remains quiet with the Chicago Blackhawks. With the draft a week away, there will be some action coming.

We’ll see if there’s anything in store beyond making their picks. But for now, here are a few things I’m hearing, plus a few leftover items from recent stories:

Trade targets to watch

• The Blackhawks are expected to look for an established defenseman this offseason, as mentioned before. John Carlson is a player they like, but the belief is he’ll sign with an Eastern Conference team.

The Buffalo Sabres’ Bowen Byram fits what they’re looking for even more. He’s a relatively young, left-handed defenseman who could fit in with what the Blackhawks are building. It obviously depends on what the Sabres want for him and whether he’s open to signing beyond next season, which is the final year of his deal. He has a $6.25 million cap hit and just turned 25 last week.

The challenge in a potential trade for Byram and in other possible trades to acquire an established player is what the Blackhawks can offer in return. They have draft picks, but a lot of teams will want players, too.

I asked The Athletic’s Sabres beat writer Matt Fairburn about that. He wrote, “I could see them using him as a way to get a forward to replace (Alex) Tuch. I doubt they would be looking for futures, but if that’s the best package they may just take assets and try to flip those for something else.”

Time will tell, but Byram is definitely a name to watch. The Blackhawks like him as a player.

• The Blackhawks could be interested in Toronto Maple Leafs winger Matthew Knies if he’s available. I don’t think they’d offer the No. 4 pick for him, though.

• I don’t get the sense the Blackhawks will pursue a trade with the Anaheim Ducks for forward Mason McTavish.

Roster updates

• Ilya Mikheyev is expected to hit the open market on July 1. Re-signing with the Blackhawks hasn’t been ruled out, but Mikheyev wants to see what his options are. There is always the chance the Blackhawks rescind their offer to him if their roster changes between now and then. AFP Analytics projects Mikheyev to receive a three-year deal with about a $3.5 million cap hit. The Blackhawks’ offer is believed to be about three years and somewhere around $4.5 million.

• The Blackhawks are expected to provide qualifying offers to restricted free agents Connor Bedard, Drew Commesso, Ethan Del Mastro and Kevin Korchinski. Dmitri Kuzmin and Ryan Mast are not expected to receive qualifying offers.

• Whenever Jonathan Toews does announce his retirement, which could come on Friday, the Blackhawks would like to discuss the possibility of him signing a one-day contract and retiring with the organization. The Blackhawks have maintained a positive relationship with Toews since he left the team.

• Coach Jeff Blashill anticipated his entire staff returning for next season.

“Now, you never know what happens, somebody may get a job offer and things like that, but as we sit here today, I anticipate our staff will be back,” Blashill said. “Really, really enjoyed the group … We were able to have very, very good discussions, certainly didn’t always see eye-to-eye. There’s a big group of us, there’s a group of like nine guys that are involved in our coaching staff, and I think we have great dialogue.

“I think just the feedback we’ve gotten from our players was real positive in terms of what they thought of our group as a coaching staff. I look forward to continue to grow with this group. It’s going to be important that we don’t take our foot off the gas at all.”

• Artyom Levshunov originally planned to split his time in Florida and Chicago this offseason, but he decided recently he’ll remain mostly in Chicago over the summer.

• When I interviewed Roman Kantserov recently, one of the things we talked about was his path to the NHL and whether he wished he would have signed earlier.

His interpreter said: “Originally when he didn’t sign with NHL right away, he maybe a little bit was regretting. But then when they won the Gagarin Cup, he knew that it was the right step to do because it’s contributed to his development and to his growth. At this point in his life, he thinks that this page has turned already. So it is what it is and he’s ready for the next step and he is moving forward with it.”

Talking tactics with Blashill

In my recently interview with Blashill, I asked him an outside-the-box tactical question and it created an interesting conversation. My question was about how in soccer coaches often add more defenders to the playing field late in games to protect leads and whether there was a possibility that could work in hockey.

Blashill: It’s an interesting question. I’m not the biggest (soccer) guy. I’ve watched some. It feels like soccer’s a little harder to score than hockey, and so I think you can probably have a little more success in preventing defense in soccer than you can in hockey. I think hockey, my gut still, the best way to kind of salt away a win is to play really efficient but not defensive, still stay on the attack, make the other team defend, but not add any unneeded risk. I think, for me, hockey is still always about risk-reward, and what’s your risk versus what’s your reward.

With the five forwards on the power play, it felt like minimal risk. There wasn’t much going the other way.

Blashill: Somebody’s asked me about three forwards on three-on-three. And by the way, that’s an area that we have to be better at. If you look at our overtime, you know, once the game ended in regulation, if we flip with some teams, we’re either a playoff team or we’re super close and we probably don’t trade people and all those kind of things.

Do you feel like you can coach three-on-three?

Blashill: I would say it’s harder to coach. The less guys on the ice, the more it becomes mano a mano — not man-on-man, but just more about the actual individuals. But you can decide what people to put on the ice. I’ve watched the evolution of three-and-three, and this goes to your question probably. If you put super high-risk, super talented but high-risk players on the ice, something’s going to happen and someone’s probably going to score one way or the other. And if you put three really defensive players on the ice, you’re probably gonna get to a shootout. And so, you can kind of dictate that a little bit.

But having three forwards on the ice doesn’t necessarily mean more risk. It just depends how responsible those guys are. If you put three high-risk-takers on, whether they’re forwards or D, that dictates it more than anything. So the power play to me, the risk in power plays and the short-handed opportunities in the power play honestly probably have more to do with the two guys on the flank than the guy up top. So whether that’s a forward or a D, that doesn’t really matter to me. It’s more about the responsibility of the two on the flank.

Are you coming around to three forwards in overtime then?

Blashill: I think that’s all based on your team. And listen, if you have really talented … Like, I don’t think Colorado is not going to put Cale Makar out there just to have three forwards on the ice … So it depends on your team and how good those individual players are, and two, how comfortable they are in those spots. That’s probably the biggest barrier for having a forward at the point on the power plays. Usually they’re just not comfortable there, and it takes too long for them to get comfortable for you to actually stay with it as a coach.

© 2026 The Athletic Media Company. All Rights Reserved. Distributed by New York Times Licensing.