Dmitri Voronkov Trade Rumors Raise Questions About Blue Jackets’ Direction

A reported effort by the Columbus Blue Jackets to move Dmitri Voronkov would put a productive, versatile winger on the market while the club is trying to stay in the playoff picture. The Athletic’s Aaron Portzline reports that general manager Don Waddell is seeking a futures deal, in part to create cap flexibility. That is a meaningful distinction: the report points to discussions, not a completed trade, and the return remains unknown.

The timing is what makes the possibility hard to square with Columbus’ needs. Voronkov has been scratched for four games this season, even as his underlying results have ranked among the team’s better marks. If the coaching staff doesn’t see a regular role for him, a move may follow. But dealing away a player who can help at even strength and on the power play could leave the roster with a new problem to solve.

Production that’s difficult to replace

Voronkov is third among Columbus forwards in on-ice expected-goals percentage at 52.5%, and fourth in Corsi percentage at 54%, according to the cited figures. Those measures don’t tell the whole story of a player’s value, but they support the case that his minutes have helped the team control play. His profile also brings something the Blue Jackets can use: size, a net-front presence, dependable shifts and touch around the crease.

His scoring record gives that profile more weight. Across the past three seasons, Voronkov has scored 58 goals for Columbus, with only Adam Fantilli’s 71 ahead among players currently on the roster. Voronkov has also led the team with 21 power-play goals over that span. Those are substantial contributions from a winger the article describes as having spent most of his Blue Jackets career in the top six.

That history makes his recent time out of the lineup stand out. A player who can provide net-front pressure and finish with the man advantage has a clear potential use, particularly if the club needs more from its power play. Whether Voronkov can fill that role under Rick Bowness is a coaching decision. Still, four healthy scratches make it fair to ask whether the gap is about fit, deployment or the team’s plans for the roster.

Columbus has had power-play trouble, according to the source article, and Voronkov’s scoring record makes his absence from the lineup a notable part of that discussion. His past results don’t guarantee he would fix the unit’s current issues; power-play performance depends on the full group and its execution. But a player with 21 power-play goals over three seasons is a reasonable option to examine before turning his roster spot into future assets.

A familiar risk for Columbus

The comparison with last year’s Egor Chinakhov trade is central to the concern. Columbus sent Chinakhov to Pittsburgh for second- and third-round draft picks and winger Danton Heinen. The source article reports that Chinakhov then scored 18 goals and 36 points in 43 games for the Penguins before signing a three-year extension over the summer. Those results don’t establish what Voronkov would do elsewhere, but they offer a recent reminder that a young Russian winger can gain value after leaving Columbus.

There is a different roster context here, too. The Blue Jackets used the picks from the Chinakhov deal to recover selections spent acquiring Mason Marchment from Seattle. Marchment, described as a strong contributor in Columbus, left in free agency. The sequence left the club with draft capital, but it also meant losing a player who had helped the roster. If Voronkov is moved for futures, the return’s value will depend on what Columbus does with those assets and whether they address an immediate need.

That’s the key question for Waddell: what does a futures return accomplish for a team with playoff ambitions? Creating cap room can support other roster changes, but flexibility alone doesn’t score goals or improve the lineup. Unless the deal is part of a broader plan, Columbus risks exchanging a proven contributor for assets whose eventual impact is uncertain.

The source article also points to several established depth and defensive options on the roster: Heinen, Ryan Lomberg, Erik Gudbranson and Carson Soucy. The author’s argument is that the club already has players who can bring a lower-event style, while proven scoring is harder to find. That’s an opinion about roster balance, but Voronkov’s production makes it a useful question as Columbus considers how to use its available cap space.

What the return needs to answer

Portzline’s report describes Waddell’s interest in a futures deal as an attempt to open cap room. It doesn’t identify a trade partner, specify the return or say a deal is imminent. Until those details emerge, the best read is that the Blue Jackets are weighing a roster decision, not that Voronkov is already on his way out.

If Columbus does move him, the return will need to reflect more than his current place in the lineup. His goal totals, power-play production and strong possession figures give the club a case to seek meaningful value. A modest package of distant assets could look especially costly if Voronkov continues to produce elsewhere, as Chinakhov did after his departure.

There’s also a practical alternative to a trade: give Voronkov a sustained chance to play and assess whether he can help the team now. His four scratches show the coaching staff hasn’t consistently chosen that route this season. But the reported cap goal raises the possibility that roster construction, not performance alone, is driving the discussion.

Columbus can make a futures deal work if the move clears room for a larger plan that improves the team’s playoff chances. Without that next step, the transaction would trade immediate scoring for an uncertain future return. For now, the clearest thing to watch is whether Waddell’s search for flexibility brings back assets that match Voronkov’s value—and whether the Blue Jackets have a concrete use for the cap space they would create.