Halford & Brough in the Morning - Do The Canucks Need To Shake Up Their Core?

Episode Date: January 16, 2025

In hour two, Mike & Jason discuss if the Canucks need to shake up the locker room by trading one of their core players (3:00), plus they speak with Sirius XM NHL's Jonathan Davis (27:11) about the LA Kings, who get set to play Vancouver this evening.  This podcast is produced by Andy Cole and Greg Balloch. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

Music 7-0-1 on a Thursday. Happy Thursday everybody, Halford Brough, Sportsnet 650. Halford and Brough of the Morning is brought to you by Pacific Honda, North Vancouver's premier destination for Honda vehicle sales and service. They have a friendly, knowledgeable staff that can help with anything you're looking for, sales, financing, service, or parts. We are now in Hour two of the program. Hour two is brought to you by Jason Hominuk from jason.mortgage.

If you love giving the banks more of your money, then don't let Jason shop around to find the perfect mortgage for you. See, no one likes to give the banks more of their money. So you should do the exact opposite of everything I say in that read, except for this part. Visit him on the internet at jason.mortgage. We are coming to you live from the Kintec studio. Kintec footwear and orthotics working together with you in step.

It sounded like you were just kind of like bullying me there. I was forcing you off the instep. I could pick up the instep part and you don't have to do it. That could be my kicker. One step. But why don't we just do a read? You're over- over complicating this. You just read the words on the paper

and they come out of your mouth and that's it. Fine. You guys wanna be that way, you can be that way. I appreciate you adding your art to this or trying to make some sort of, you know. It's called pizzazz Andy. Yeah, yeah. Get some. Sell the steak, not the sizzle.

That's right. Wait, is there what you're doing? Last night. Aside from getting that phrase completely wrong, everything was right. Here's our waiter, selling the steak, underplaying the sizzle. After another slow start to the season, Edmonton, last night, improved to 28, 13, and three with a win over the Minnesota wild.

Very entertaining game. Lots of goals, lots of, uh, east west passing, lots of shots on goal. Minnesota's really banged up. Yeah. It was still a good game. Uh, pod Colson, our old friend, pod Colson got the winner, his six goal of the season, but two guys stood out last night. Connor McDavid with two goals and an assist and a chicken wing and Calvin Pickard was some really

spectacular saves. And I know all the Oilers after the game were quite complimentary of Calvin Pickard, the backup goalie. Will he be in the playoffs? We'll see, probably Skinner is going to be the guy. But Pickard was good last night. The Oilers weren't perfect defensively, but they got another win.

So we all know the Oilers are capable of winning the cup. And if you're going to reply to that, it was like, what do you mean? Haven't won the cup yet. They fell one game short last season and game seven was a two, one decision. That's as close as you can get without going to overtime in game seven.

They are clearly capable of getting it done. And I'm sure the narrative of the 1980s Oilers will be raised as it's probably already been raised, but it'll probably, you'll probably hear it more and more as the playoffs approach. And the narrative of the eighties Oilers was that those guys needed an unsuccessful trip to the finals in 1983 against the New York Islanders in order to learn how to get it done. And they saw how banged up and they saw how much the Islanders sacrificed.

And then the very next year they faced the Islanders again, 1984, they won the cup. Yep. I'm sure there's some truth to that narrative. I'm sure the Oilers did learn some things in their series against Florida last year. And one of those things would be, don't fall behind three nothing. It's a tough one to learn, but you got to learn it.

And the other one is you got to dig in. That's true. You got to dig in. Two lessons. It's such a different league now than, uh, compared to, um, the eighties with the salary cap. That 83, 84 Oilers team was absolutely stacked with future hall of famers. Edmonton's goal differential that season was plus 132. That's pretty good.

That's better than the Bruins goal differential was a couple of years ago when they had that crazy regular season, then lost in the first round of Florida. Heading into the playoffs that year, here's another thing. There really weren't many teams in the Campbell Conference that were going to stop them from reaching the finals again. And they swept the first round. It was a best of five. Calgary pushed them a little bit, pushed them to seven games, but they were

clearly the better team in that series. I think they swept the conference final and then they beat the Islanders in the final. Like it was, it was a different league then, but I still do think that you're going to hear a lot of stories about the Oilers going to the Stanley Cup final, learning some things and maybe this year they can get over the hump. Well, there's just so many, there's just so many teams that could have the Oilers going to the Stanley Cup final, learning some things and maybe this year they can get over the hump. There's just so many teams that could in theory

beat them in a seven game series. Well on that note, harkening back to the glory days of yesteryear of the Edmonton Oilers, last night Connor McDavid passed guess who to become the second all time leading scorer in Edmonton Oilers franchise history? Messy Yari Curry. Oh curry. Yeah, he was number two Gratzkis number one You kind of like you and his total actually isn't all that out of reach for

McDavid with the Oilers with the Oilers right because it was basically 1700 points 16. I think it was 1669, nice. And McDavid is already at 1044. So he's gonna pass that in the next four or five years anyway. Well, if he signs with the Oilers. Right, until he leaves and goes to Boston. Yeah.

Which we pointed out yesterday. Speaking of the glory days of the National Hockey League and things that you could do in yesteryear that you can't do anymore, do you wanna dive into this Patrick Johnson article from the weekend that you so diligently worked through? Cause it was a good one. I didn't even see it this week. It's just an article in the province.

It's not like the toughest reading. I, yeah, most of it's phonetically sounded out for you. You see have problems with the big words. I think he just, Patrick wrote an article about Pat Quinn in the early nineties. He'd just taken over the Canucks and he had to turn them around. And he looked at the team and he didn't like what he saw.

He didn't like the vibe of the room. He thought he needed to make some changes and it was a lot easier to make changes back then. You could just pick up the phone and make a trade if you wanted. There was no hard salary cap. There was nothing like that. And he started out by acquiring Gerald Diddick

from the Montreal Canadians. And he writes that Diddick had become a spare part in Montreal after three seasons with the New York Islanders. And so he got Gerald Diddick. So he had some toughness on the blue line. And then he made a couple other trades to add some toughness.

He brought in Dana Merzen from the Calgary Flames, but the big trade was with St. Louis. And these are the types of deals that I really, really, really miss. They're the multiplayer blockbuster deals and Pat Quinn traded Garth Butcher, who was a real fan favorite here in Vancouver. He's a big, tough dude. His name sounded tough, Garth Butcher. That's the toughest name ever. That's true.

And a guy named Dan Quinn to St. Louis, and Dan Quinn could put up some points. Traded them to the blues for Jeff Cortinal, Cliff Ronning, Sergio Mmeso, and another hard nosed defenseman in Robert Dirk. And all four of those guys played regularly for the Canucks. Again, obviously it's a lot harder to make trades in today's NHL, but I think the point of the article, at least how I read it, is that sometimes you really do have to shake things up.

The spirit of the article. And it's not really shaking things up unless you take some risks. In order to really shake it up, you're probably going to draw some criticism. It's not shaking it up to add someone in free agency. It's not shaking it up to, you know, exchange minor league defensemen. Garth Butcher was a fan favorite in Vancouver. Ronning bounced around and played, even played a year in

Europe because everyone thought he was too small. Cortinal was onto his fourth NHL team in St. Louis. He put up good numbers, but he was bouncing around the league. And both those guys really played well for them, became part of the core. And the Canucks in a few years went to the Stanley Cup final against the New York Rangers. Now they also had Trevor Linden, they had Pavel Bury, they had Kirk McClain. So a lot of things came together.

And again, it was easier to trade players back then. But I do think there is something to be said that Pat Quinn looked at the room and he said, we're missing something here, right? And maybe it was the style of player too, and that he acquired some big, strong guys. And the Canucks, forget for a second what Pat Quinn did because it is a bit of an apples and oranges thing, but it does introduce this well.

The Canucks need to be honest with themselves about what they have. We are not in the room, The fans aren't in the room. The media is not in the room. We don't have a day to day working relationship with any of these guys. When people ask us, what's up with JT? What's up with Elias Pedersen? Our honest answer is like, I have some theories,

but I don't know. I don't know how much injuries have been a factor in their play. I don't know how hard they work on a day-to-day basis. I don't know whether or not they're good team guys. Some days they look like good team guys, other days they really don't. The Canucks should know this stuff for sure. Like they're right there. They're working with these guys on a day to day basis.

They should be able to diagnose the problems if there are serious problems. And if it's not gonna work in Vancouver for either of those guys, you gotta move them. You can't just hope it's gonna work out. Like you gotta make the call at some point fairly soon though because you can't keep operating like this. I think they wanted to operate like this for a bit.

I think they wanted to hold their feet to the fire. Well, fine. You've done that now. So what are the results? What are you seeing? Is this the response you were looking for? How long before you have your answer? Because as I said yesterday, the clock is ticking on both those guys for different reasons. JT for his age and Elias Pedersen for his no move clause, which kicks in July 1st. Yeah. The issue, and I'm not disagreeing with anything you're saying about the The issue and I'm not disagreeing with anything you're saying about the

almost need to be bold and to make that big bold stroke or decision. I'm with you on that 100 percent. The frustrating part is that with the current financial landscape and hard hard cap system, it feels like the risk is never worth the reward because it's so risky, because these these deals if you make and you lose Not only is it punitive but it gets thrown back in your face We saw an example of it yesterday in Pittsburgh oddly enough when Tristan Jarre got put on waivers is there was about 15 think-pieces About the worst deals that Kyle Dubas has made and how a bad contract with

Jari and a bad trade with Carlson has doomed the Penguins with Kyle Dubas. And it's unfortunate because if this was those glory days of the 80s, you'd say, yeah, I screwed up the Carlson deal. Yeah, I screwed up the Jari deal. I'll just make a couple more deals to fix it. It's such an impossible landscape to do. And to be dead honest with what you're talking. But that's a job, right? That's a job. It is the job. It's tough. It's tough. And sometimes you just have to admit your mistakes and move on.

And in this instance, I think that making it even more frustrating for guys like you and I and a bunch of listeners right now is that that want and that need to shake things up is probably nowhere more prevalent than in that Connex front office because they've got the oldest of the old school movers and shakers in Jim Rutherford. You remember as I went back when we were going through all this stuff and looked at his time in Pittsburgh, there was a run there where old Jimbo was making a move every four weeks with regularity. There was a move every month and it was on, like you said,

is the room got the good vibe of the, when you do a vibe check and you don't like the vibe, trade. So we got a text in here. If you want to ensure Quinn Hughes is gone in two years, simply trade Pedersen. I get what you're saying. And I don't want to be a jerk.

And I don't want to fight. But how the hell do you know? How the hell do you know what Quinn Hughes is really thinking? What the hell do you know? Quinn might be tired of all this. Quinn might be tired of all this. He might be ready to turn the page on some of this. He's out there like working his butt off. He's playing through injuries.

He's playing at a very, very, very high level. And he's got two guys in his leadership group that are constantly under the microscope and not reaching their potential. Now he's the captain of the team and he should have a little bit of input on it. And I don't know if all GMs would have a conversation with their captain. Some GMs and president of hockey ops are like,

I'm in charge of the players you play. I don't care if you're the captain. But if you were to go to Quinn and you were to say, we're thinking of making this move, what do you think? And he would say, don't do that. Don't, don't. I have a hundred percent faith in Alias

Pedersen. You would take that into consideration. Sure. But yeah, but we don't know. We don't know what those conversations are. Quinn Hughes might be the most frustrated of everyone. He's putting together an unbelievable season. He's supposed to be the leader of the team

and he's got all this nonsense going on, on his watch. This whole notion too of you're always gonna lose the trade when you trade away the best player. Yeah, it's been true most of the time, sure. But sometimes you still have to make the deal just to move forward, just to move forward with things. Again, what happens if you trade JT, okay? And then Elias, all right, let's go.

Okay, no more excuses. Trade away JT, got you some wingers. We already got you those wingers. You seem to be really doing all that much with them, but here you go. We're stuck with you now, because you control. We're stuck with you now, because you control. You got the no move clause. And you're stuck, we're stuck with you

and you're stuck with us. Go for it. Trade it away JT Miller. Trade away the problem. Yeah. Good luck. And the Canucks need to answer this question. And this is the hard one. How will Pedersen respond to answer this question. And this is the, this is the hard one.

How will Pedersen respond to that? Sure. And again, I don't know. I think in the back of my mind, I'm like, man, if he can just get a great off season of working hard, put some strength on, find his confidence again, uh, maybe he can come back and be the Pedersen that we've seen in the past. Yeah.

I think, I think everyone has to be cognizant of the fact that like. But I don't know. I don't have the information to make that bet. Everyone has to be cognizant of the fact that doing one doesn't equate the other. Like just because you trade and in this instance, like it is a very dangerous thing to say you trade Miller and you solve the Pedersen problem.

To say that that's the, like the end result or how the equation is going to work out is dangerous because you don't know. I'll say this though, if you want to take the risk and you want to get crazy and you want to change it up, there are some deals in recent history where fortune has favored the bold, right? One of them very recently was when the Florida Panthers went out and acquired Matthew Kachuk and they paid a pretty penny for it. They gave up a lot. They gave up their best forward at the time. I mean, you could argue that it was Barkoff,

but Hubert Oh was playing fantastic hockey for them, a hundred plus point guy. And they had to trade away a very good defenseman and Weger. Some people thought it might got the team's depth, but fortune favored the bull. They got Matthew Kachuk. That deal worked out. You go back a year prior, Vegas gave up a ton, a ton to get Jack Eichel in the door. And there were a lot of concerns that Eichel was never going to be the player and never going to reach his ceiling after the very complex neck and back surgery that he had and that there was a stain on him from his time in Buffalo that maybe he was a petulant whiner

that wasn't going to be a guy that you could win with. It worked for Vegas and it worked for the Panthers because they made big bold moves to a team that was in a pseudo window or in a full-fledged window, whatever the case. They weren't afraid to go out and make a bold move because I think they knew that whatever the mix that they had either necessarily wasn't going to get it done or that it could get better. And that, I mean, and look, if you look at the connects right now, there's room to get better.

Look at the standings. Yeah. You know? And sometimes it can be best for both teams. Not all the time. Sometimes it can be best for both teams. Not all the time. Sometimes it can be best for both teams. If you trade away a guy that just isn't thriving on your team, in your market for whatever reason, and that guy gets a fresh start and you open up just avenues, just different roads. Yeah. And sometimes I look at the Canucks and the thought of bringing back Besser, not trading

JT, not trading Elias. I just, I don't picture in my head, and I hope I'm wrong here. I Don't picture in my head that group raising the cup Yeah, that that's I mean, especially right now. That's probably a very I don't think I've ever it's probably very realistic I've ever it's probably very well. I mean, I don't look at it like that. I Don't how do you look at it? I look at it is that you build, is it everyone's trying to build a core, right? And Well, they've built theirs. Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

And that there's not one particular core where I'm like, that's the one, maybe Edmonton, but Edmonton got to the dance last year and didn't get it done. They haven't got it done in McDavid's 28 years old now. Outside of that, you're building a core. You're saying, can this team one get in and then two, can we do some damage when we get there? Your core guys. And right now I would say the biggest of the core guys is that you've got the best

defenseman in the NHL in that core. And that's something that 31 other NHL teams can't say. So to me, that's a big plus in your core group. With the other two guys, it comes down to, is this going to be the rocky point of the journey? Where are they saying, oh, they went through some tough times, they went through a lot of adversity. It wasn't always rosy in Vancouver. Or is this the fracture in the journey where you gotta go

on an entirely different path? So I do want to read some texts here because I think they're good texts. TJ from Surrey texts in terrible trade comparables, both Florida and Vegas got the younger superstars. All you prove is Vancouver is likely to lose any Pedersen trade. That is fair. I'm not suggesting that the

Conuxtias willy-nilly trade Alias Pedersen. What I'm saying is be honest with yourself and then at some point end all this nonsense. You either commit to these guys, and I mean, how many years are we gonna have JT Miller in trade talks? It's not, I realize that sometimes management groups wanna throw this stuff out there just to give a shot to the players, wake them up and see how they respond. I'm not even all that against that.

But you can't, you can't, you can't keep operating like this. At some point you have to make a decision. And what I'm saying is like, I know this is kind of the famous Jim Benning quote here, but I don't have all the information. I don't know. I don't have the information to make the

bet on whether or not Elias Pedersen can return to form. I don't know what's going on with JT Miller in his life, right? I don't know how injured he is, but the Canucks do know all of this information. And what I'm saying is that one way or the other, this nonsense has to end. It's not a good way to run a hockey team and the fan base is getting frustrated.

You're either committed to these guys or you're not. And if you're not committed to those guys, you got to move them because you can't keep running like this. Well, I think what you said, Jason, sort of sums it up perfectly. Like if you can encapsulate it into one sentence, and this is probably, I would hope, what management is thinking as well, can they win a Stanley Cup with this core group of players?

Like it's that simple. Was last season an outlier? Is last season, can they be that good again? Can they continue to grow? Or is this core just not what it is? Do they have to make a change? Can they win a Stanley Cup is this core just not what it is? Do they have to make a change? Can they win a Stanley Cup with this core group of players?

Like in theory, in theory, you would think you got Pedersen and Miller as your top two centers, Besser on the wing. He scored 40 goals last season, right? He brought in some other good wingers, some depth guys, Jake DeBras, Connor Garland, Dakota Joshua, you've got some good death, Kiefer Sherwood. Then on the back end, you've got the, you know, the Norris trophy winner

in Quinn Hughes. You had another good defenseman in Philip Peronik. You add a defenseman at the deadline. Hopefully that's a top four guy. You're going to have a cap space because you're accruing it. And then you got pretty good goaltending in Thatcher Demko and Kevin Lankinen. On paper, in theory, sounds like a good team. Doesn't look like it though, right? And I know there's been injuries and I know last season they did okay, but last season they still were a long way away

from winning the Stanley Cup. They really were. They had to improve, They had to get better. They had to make strides. It was a good first step. And they haven't done it. And they haven't done it. And in fact, they've regressed. And you also have to remember last year, everything went right for them. Right? No injuries, P. Ogleberg. And this season, I don't know, I, like, I'll throw this question out to the listeners, maybe.

What's your reaction if the Canucks resign Besser and keep the core together? Are you happy or not? Because some people, everyone's going to be different on that. Yeah. Some people really do think this court can win a cup. Do you believe in the core? But does management? Do you believe that? That is this does management? Do you believe, that is this question, that is the big question here. Do you believe in the core of the Canucks? Text in, Dunbar Lumbert Text Line at 650-650. We're here for another 90 minutes.

Show runs all the way through till nine o'clock. We gotta go to break, but before we go to break, I need to tell you about two things. One, Rogers Xfinity TV. HGTV has a new address. All the latest HGTV shows are now available on channel 409 only on Rogers Xfinity TV. I also need to tell you about the Clayton Public House. Reserve your spot for the big football party at the Clayton Public House

hosted by Sportsnet 650. Visit the Clayton Pub.com for more. The Clayton Public House. Good food, good people, good times. We're going to preview tonight's game. Canucks King seven o'clock from Rogers arena from the King side of things on the other side with Jonathan Davis from Sirius XM NHL radio. You're listening to the Halford and Bref show on Sportsnet.

Six 50. Hey, it's Vic Nazar. Have your say and join me on the People's Show with big takes and even bigger bets weekdays 3-4 on Sportsnet 650 or wherever you get your podcasts. 732 on a Thursday. Happy Thursday everybody. Happy Canucks game day everybody. You're listening to the Haliford and Brough show on Sportsnet 650. Haliford and Brough of the morning is brought to you by Vancouver Honda, Vancouver's

premier destination for Honda customers. They have a friendly, knowledgeable staff that can help with anything you're looking for, sales, financing, service, or parts. We are in hour two of the program. Hour two is brought to you by Jason Hominuk from Jason.mortgage. If you love giving the banks more of your money, then don't let Jason shop around to find the perfect mortgage for you. Visit him on the internet at Jason dot mortgage. As mentioned, it is the Los Angeles Kings in town tonight. Seven o'clock Rogers arena.

You can hear the game right here on sports net six 50 real quick on the programming for tonight. Uh, connect central goes from 4 p.m. To 6 p.m. With sat and Dan sat and Dan will then turn it over to do pregame action from six to seven. The call of tonight's game begins at seven o'clock. You can hear it all right here with Randee and batch at seven o'clock and then following the game, our post game show goes all the way until 11 PM.

Big game ahead. There's lots of storylines tonight for the Los Angeles Kings. Joining us now to talk a little bit more about the Kings from serious XM NHL radio Jonathan Davis here on the Halford and brush show on sports net 650. Morning Jonathan. How are you? I'm doing great gentlemen. How are you? We're well, we are eagerly Anticipating tonight's game for a multitude of reasons one Hopeful that the Canucks can bounce back from a terrible performance in Winnipeg last time out. Two, there's the whole Tanner-Geneau-Brock-Besser revenge angle to get at as well.

And three, it's a pretty good Los Angeles Kings team, 24-12-5, the third in the Pacific Division. They have lost two in a row, so they come in on a little mini losing streak. But outside of that, it's been a very successful first half of this season for the Los Angeles Kings. Has it not, Jonathan? It has. No, no question. I mean, and, you know, as you mentioned, I mean, they've lost two in a row and the offense has kind of dried up of late. I mean, they've got, you know, they scored what two goals or less past the goalie in their last five games. They've got four goals in regulation in their last four games. So, you know, this is a team that I think really the sum of the parts is just greater than any one individual. And I think, you know, that's something that's been said with LA for, you know, the last

number of years, but they found a way to make it work, you know, outside of, you know, the worst power play in the NHL, they're finding ways to win. If you look at the offensive production on this team, and it's low, right? I think they're eighth lowest scoring team in the NHL, compensated by the fact that they're the stingiest team in the NHL, but offensively speaking, like the guys that do the business, Copa Tarr and Kempe,

they're doing their thing. But then if you look, there's a lot of guys that you would expect a little bit more production from guys like Fiala, guys like Byfield, et cetera, et cetera, that haven't really lived up to their end of the bargain. So how are the Kings still having success with those guys underachieving? Because they're just not giving up goals. And it really puts a lot of pressure on both Darcy Kemper and David Riddick not

to allow more than a goal. I mean, especially of late, like, as I said, you know, it's, it's two goals or less, uh, you know, in their last five games. And so it does, it's very taxing. It's, you know, it's interesting, you know, I mentioned the power play being 31st of the league and I was talking to somebody who works with the team, uh, yesterday and I'm like, what's going on with the power play? Why can't even when they've got an extra man on the ice score? And the response that I got was rather interesting.

He says they worked so hard five on five to find ways to manufacture goals that when they get to the power play, it's almost like a two minute break for them. Guys are just kind of relaxing. They just don't know this is a team that just doesn't have, you know, when can't they hit the ice, there's a good chance that a goal is going to be scored. But after that, guys, you're hoping that someone's going to score and, and byfield, you know, went through a stretch recently, I think it was like five and eight games and, you know, really seem to turn things around. I mean, the one thing I will say with Quentin Byfield is that he has become that 200 foot player.

I took a look last year, I think he played about a minute 40 of PK time the entire year. He averaged one second of PK time. I think he's he is part of their second unit on the PK with Warren Fogle. And what that's done is that it is really taken a lot of the PK time away from Anze Kopitar and taken the hard minutes away from Kopitar. As Quentin Byfield, I mean, did people call it his season last year, a breakthrough season? Has he really broken through to the level that people expected when he was drafted second overall in 2020?

I wouldn't, well, you know, last year it started out as a breakthrough and then, you know, he went through a stretch of like, like, you know, he scored like a one goal in his last 25 games, I think it was. And, you know, and, and that goal came in the last game of the year against Chicago when he earned himself a pretty hefty bonus, I think

it was like 250,000. And the year just, you know, it started off like what three goals in his first like 30 plus games. And, but I think part of the problem with byfield guys is that, you know, all summer long and into training camp, this was the guy that was going to, you know, be their number two or three setter. And then after five games, that plan went away and they moved him back to the wing and he was playing with Copa Taranque. And now we're starting to see, you know, he's now gone back to center and we're seeing, you know, a guy that, you know,

why LA drafted him, you know, third overall, he has started, you know, he's really developed into that 200 foot player. But I, you know, breakthrough, I mean, I think now we're starting to see, and I'm not surprised it's taken him until, you know, January or late December to become what they had hoped. But I think there's still, there's still an expectation of more from him. And the one thing that I am a little confused about is that he had a nice run going, playing with Fogel and Janot, and then that's kind of backed off a little as Jim Hiller, for whatever reason, loves to play 11 and 7.

And it really messes up the forward groups. I want to talk about the playoffs, assuming the Kings make it. What would be the reaction among the Kings fan base if they match up with the Edmonton Oilers again? Well, I think that is definitely a major topic of conversation as well as they're doing right now. It will come to me in game 83 and if they have

to play the Oilers, I've talked to, I think many people feel they're better equipped to play the Oilers than they've been in years past. I'm in that wait and see mode. I think they'd love another crack at them to just finally say that, hey, they want to beat them. I mean, they obviously want to beat them.

The game in LA about three weeks ago when they beat the Oilers 4-3 in overtime. That was an important win for LA considering what they've gone through the last couple of years. I think they would love to have another crack at them. I mean, look, at some point you would think they're going to have to beat them for them to move on. So yeah, I think they would like another crack at them, but there's definitely a little bit of nervousness if they, you know, if and when they do play them. We're speaking to Jonathan Davis from SiriusXM NHL Radio here on the Haliford and Brough show on Sportsnet 650. Jonathan, what's the latest in Drew Doughty's recovery from injury?

I think we're still looking at a couple of weeks away and, you know, I Drew, you know, Drew would have loved to have played two or three weeks ago. I mean, but I, you know, the fact that they're doing as well as they are definitely eases things for the team. There's never been a need to rush them, but there's become less of a need. I'm just intrigued to see what happens with this team when Drew comes back because that defensive group has played really well. I mean, you know, Joel Edmondson, surprisingly, has played really well and at one point was playing more minutes a night than Anze Kopitar, which doesn't really make any sense to me, but it's allowed Grant Clark to emerge.

And so what happens to the rest of this group, you know, to guys like Clark and Edmondson, you know, who are going to see their minutes reduced and how does that change their effectiveness. The one guy that's really flourished in Drew's absence is Mikey Anderson. This is a guy that, you know, somewhat played in Drew's shadow and people, you know, the feeling was is that Mikey Anderson was really good playing with Drew and we're not so sure if he could carry, you know, a top pairing unit and he sure has shown that he can carry a top pairing unit. It's a really interesting blue line without a doubt. Because the big minutes guys are like Gavrikov, Anderson,

and Edmondson. But if you look at the offensive production, as you mentioned, like Brandt Clark is their leading D-Man scorer. And he plays about 17 and 1 1.5 minutes a night. So I got to think that once they add Doughty to this group, the outlook would be like, oh we're gonna make a good group Even better, but I guess it brings up a good point from your perspective

Is that these guys kind of have identified roles right now and that might all get shuffled around Absolutely, I mean I would think you know that that guys are gonna, you know You know not named Mikey Anderson and probably Gavrikov are going to, you know, going to see their minutes cut by like, you know, at least, you know, somewhere in the two to three minute range a night. And that's going to be, it's going to be tough. I mean, I think, you know, guys are going to be frustrated by that fact because they've played so many minutes and kind of flourish. Now a guy like Edmonton, I mean, the guys have a, I think he's what had one season of playing 82 games and he's not going to get it this year because he missed

a couple of games already. But, you know, I do, I mentioned to see how, how this all pans out when Drew comes back. It's a really good problem to have, but by the same token, you know, especially Brant Clark, because Brant Clark never would have been given this opportunity if Drew Dowdy was healthy. this is you know and they you know they've tried to manage him and I do wonder like this 11 and 7 I had some people suggest to me it's 11 and 7 because they don't fully trust Brant Clark although I'm not buying that because like I've been looking at Kyle Burroughs minutes and you know whether if he's the seventh guy like played three

minutes the last game like I I still it still boggles my mind if you're going to play defenseman three minutes like just dress a 12th forward I mean I just think it would just bring more continuity to the forward group. Speaking of that forward group Kevin Fiala I'm a big plus minus guy I'm trying to bring plus minus back and I'm not getting a lot of support, but I digress. So the Kings as a team have a plus 21 goal differential and Kevin Fiala has 14 goals on the year. How the hell is Kevin Fiala minus 10 on the year on a team where like nobody else is a minus? Have you watched Kevin Fiala play? Not enough, apparently, no.

Yeah, I mean, look, this guy is an enigma to say the least and I saw a stat and I'm just trying to see if I can find it with Fiala on the ice and when he's not on the ice and the King's numbers oh are just it's's mind boggling what they are. Look, it's risk reward with Fiala. And I just, I don't get it. Like he plays more five on five minutes than anybody else in the team, which doesn't make any sense. You know, I just, I'm not a big fan.

I, you know, this is a, to me this was a bad deal when they made it. It was a bad contract, but he's their highest paid forward and yes as you brought up the numbers he's he's a minus 10 and that's just on a team that's all plus I really don't get it there there's just as I said there's just too much risk and reward to his game. I know Philip De Neno is not a goal scorer by trade. I mean, he did score 27 one year and he's had at least 17 goals in every year as a member of the LA Kings.

Three goals in 40 games a season. I mean, that's an awfully low total by any forward standards. That's Nils Hoeglander territory. What's going on there with Deno given that he's a pretty important player for this team, especially within that forward group. Yeah, he is. But I think, you know, we, we, you know, we've seen his, his, his minutes reduced on the power play. Like he got, he was getting opportunities his first couple of years.

And we've seen the drop off with him offensively over the last couple of years. And he's become more of that defensive guy, you know, back when we, you know, what we thought he was when they, when he first came over, I, I guy, you know, back when we, you know, what we thought he was when they, when he first came over. I, I, I, I just, I don't know if, I wouldn't say that he's necessarily slowed down, but he's just not getting the opportunity, the same opportunities, um, as he's had in years before. And just to go back to the Fiala thing, the Kings are a minus five with Fiala on the ice. They're plus 32 with him off the ice. So the minus 37 goal differential,

I think it's the largest in the league. Well, let's hope the Canucks get a fair dose of Kevin Fiala tonight. They need it after what happened in Winnipeg the night before. Hey, Jonathan, thanks for doing this today, man. We really appreciate it. Good analysis of all things Los Angeles Kings. Enjoy the game tonight. We'll do this again later on down

the road. My pleasure. And let's hope for your sake cause she does have 10 and 18 versus Vancouver in his career. Okay. Maybe we don't want Kevin Fiala in the ice. Thanks. Thanks bud. Appreciate it. All right. Take care. Jonathan Davis from serious XM NHL radio here on the health for the breath show on sports net six 50. Apparently we're diving into the Dunbar Lumber

text message in basket because it's popping this morning. A lot of messages. I threw out pretty much the biggest question you can ask about the Vancouver Canucks and it's that, do you believe in this core? And I suggested a scenario where the Canucks re-signed Brock Besser.

They don't trade Pedersen or Miller. And I said, how do you feel about that? Put yourselves in the future and maybe that happens. What's your reaction to this? And let me guess, everyone was like, yes, let's do that. Not everyone was like that. What? But I will start with a, with a positive.

Dalvier texts in, yes, I do believe in this core. With a further improved D core, I genuinely do believe they could win a cup. Quinn is that special kind of player and so is Petey if he can be his best. At the same time, I'm not blind to all the nonsense, so I wouldn't be appalled by a trade out of the core, however, in that case for me, it'd have to be

Miller trading the younger, higher ceiling center is a no-go. Mike, the urologist, there were some people that just texted in, no, I don't believe in the core. No, and there weren't many yeses, okay? Mike, the urologist from Rockville, texted in, the only people that believe in this core are young folks who naively love these players because they don't know any better.

I like it. Blame the kids. I mean, there is something to that. Third coach, one and a half years of any degree of success. Couldn't be more clear. The core needs a change. And I'm convinced Patrick Alveen and Jim Rutherford feel the same. There is, I mean, the whole vacuum in that you're really like very insular

and you're not looking at all the 31 other teams across the league and you're existing in this Vancouver vacuum. There is some merit to that because if you, um, if you take a look outside and you look at some of these other core groups, they haven't been given this many bites at the apple. And I'm talking about head coaches. When you're in your third head coach, you've pretty much run your course. Like you might get a fourth guy, but at that point it's like,

is the leader really gonna make a difference? Like is the guy that's telling who should jump over the boards and who's coming up with the slogans, is he really gonna dictate this? Or is it about the players that the core is made up of? And for the record, that is not to suggest that Rick Tocket can't do a better job or he might want to try some different things.

I'm frustrated at times watching this team play the style that it plays. I would like to see more East West passing in the offensive zone. That's my big thing. I'm tired of the low high, back to the point, I would like to see more East-West passing in the offensive zone. That's my big thing. I'm tired of the low high, back to the point, throw it on net.

Love a good point shot. Yeah, does it work sometimes? Does it have to be part of your arsenal? Absolutely, but you also need to get creative in the offensive zone and so many goals. I mean, watching the Oilers last night, so many of their goals are scored watching the Oilers last night. So many of their goals are, are scored on East-West passing plays.

I also know that Rick Dawkins wants the guys to make more plays with the puck. So he's been out there, he's said like, I don't want them just throwing it away all the time. Like that's not what I necessarily want. And I also think that the management group does deserve some criticism for the blue line as it currently stands. The changes that they made in the off season have not worked. In fact,

things have gotten worse. But I would chuckle to put Pedersen's struggles or Miller when he's not on his struggles solely at the feet of the system that they play or some of the defensemen that are on the team. Great players make things happen themselves. Quinn Hughes does it, great player. That's what great players do. They make things happen. They're a catalyst for things. They don't rely on everything being perfect

in order for them to make an impact on the game. And that is not what we've seen from Alias Pedersen in the last year. He is not out there making things happen. And I don't know why. So, okay. I knew someone was going to text this in as soon as I said, and started running through the

number of coaches that the Cores had. Someone texted in and kudos on you for living up to the expectations I had. How many coaches is Connor McDavid had? The answer is five. If you can run through them all without looking it up good on you but it goes Todd McClellan, Ken Hitchcock, Dave Tippett, Jay Woodcroft. And now, of course, currently, Chris Knobloch. I don't think that you can ever use Connor McDavid as a comp for anything. They used to have remember, we used to talk to and go down the way back machine here, Mark De Santos, when he was the manager of the Vancouver Whitecaps.

And any time they'd bring a new player in, we used to ask like, who's a comparable? Who's a comp? And where's it? Who's a player in Europe right now? And he would kind of dance around. And then finally he said, he's like, look, the comps are great and everything. And there's always players you can point to,

but there's two players that we never use as a comp. Messi and Ronaldo, because they're unicorns and you never use them. Never bring their names up. Never say like, that's why we joked when they used to call Gull the Scottish messy, right? It was like, you just don't do it because there's two guys that are not comparable to anything

because they're unicorns. I would put Connor McDavid in that territory. If you have Connor McDavid in your core, then you go through 9,000 coaches or 10,000 and you just keep, because that is the singular talent that is Connor McDavid. He's alone. He is.

I don't think there's, there's not a single player in the NHL that plays like him. Yeah. The closest is probably McKinnon and I would run through a million coaches with McKinnon as well. But to suggest that. And who have been the Constance in Edmonton? It's been. McDavid and Dreisau.

And Nuge. Yep. Nuge is a weird one. Nuge Dreisau. And Nuge. Yep. Nuge is a weird one. Nuge has played for about a thousand coaches. Yeah. But like they moved on from guys like Jordan Eberle. Sure, they moved on from a lot of guys.

And I just think that that's almost a singular, leave that alone on a mantle. I would also put Crosby in that category. And now you're getting to the point where you might move on, but you've already got a lot of winning out of Sydney Crosby under yes, a lot of different head coaches. My point would be, see, if we're just focused on the, he's been there for a while. My point would be with the Vancouver connects and the three coaches that they've

gone through is there are some very disturbing trends. And one of them is that they've shown that they can play well under these head coaches, but it always sort of regresses back. There's a regression back. There's that step not forward or learning the lessons or taking the success that they've had and adding to it. We've tasted success and then we kind of revert to being the team that we were prior to the

success and that's problematic. That's problematic. Now, all that being said, if you were to look at this objectively and just look on this team on paper, and I know we went over this in the last segment, all the pieces are there. If you didn't have the exact names

on the back of the jerseys and the personalities, and you said, hey, where would an expansion team go? Houston. I'm gonna give you a core of the best defenseman in the NHL, two centers, one of whom has scored 100 points in the league, and the other one who won the Calder, and a Vezna caliber goalie. They both scored 100 points.

Yeah, right, I'm just divvying up the things. And a Vezna caliber goalie, the Houston expansion team would be like, yes, please give me that. I think I can win a Stanley cup with that. Right. If you, if you don't. Isn't that the frustrating thing though? That's the extremely frustrating thing.

Like it's not, it's not an easy question to answer of do you believe in the core? I really don't because on paper someone texted in and they said on paper, I believe in the core. In reality, no. And I think that's kind of where I'm at as well because I'm watching it play out right now. Watching them over the first 40 games of this season has given me more pause than I can remember out of a team

that is so loaded with talent. That's, again, I went back to what we were saying after the Winnipeg game. The frustrating part isn't that they're laying these colossal eggs. It's that they're doing it after playing really good games against really good opponents. I want to read a good gardening analogy from Sarah.

I like a good gardening analogy. To use a gardening analogy, sometimes you need to just get rid of the rot and dead limbs. Right now there is something eating away at the team and limbs not producing. The rot and the dead branches need to be pruned back. Cultivating and fertilizing through motivation and trades has not worked this far. Now this means that in the immediate,

it looks like a net loss, but as we know from gardening, the shrub grows back bigger and more beautiful. this far now, this means that in the immediate, it looks like a net loss, but as we know from gardening, the shrub grows back bigger and more beautiful. I think the problem with your analogy, Sarah, is that you would have a different identification of what is the rot, right? Like some people would say it's Petey,

some people would say it's Miller, some people would say it's Petey. Some people would say it's Miller. Some people would say it's the decor. Some people would say it's the head coach. You know, that is. Sure. What's the root cause of the rot? What are you pruning away here? Yeah.

Right? It's tough. Well, I mean, the answer is obviously right now. Right now, Miller or Pedersen. Which some people would say talk it. Some people would say the decor, right? Adam Kears and Blatt. That's a good Halford.

Adam Kears and Blatt is going to join us next on the Halford and Bruff Show on Sportsnet 650. Before we go to break, I need to tell you about Rogers Xfinity TV, looking for your favorite culinary content. If so, Food Network has all new seasons of your favorite food shows on Channel 410 and it's only on Rogers Xfinity TV