Halford & Brough in the Morning - The Best of Halford and Brough 1/15/26

Episode Date: January 15, 2026

Mike & Jason look back at the previous day in sports, they discuss Canucks president Jim Rutherford's comments on committing to a proper rebuild, plus they preview tonight's road matchup at Columbus with Canucks Talk host & The Athletic Vancouver's Thomas Drance. 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.

You're listening to the best of Halford and Brough. You're listening to Halford and Brough. Right circle, Michael shoots, stop, and a runaround, stone, score. Vegas wins in overtime. He sure has a step. Moves it back. We've got to work hard. We've got to work together.

We've got to stick together. We've got to stay together. And we've got to compete together. And that's what we're going to do. Sticking together is what good waffles do. I knew it was coming. Good morning, Vancouver 601 on a Thursday. Happy Thursday, everybody.

It is Halford and his broth. It is SportsNet 650. We are coming you live from the Kintech Studios in beautiful Fairview Slopes in Vancouver. Jason, good morning. Good morning. Adol, good morning to you. Good morning.

Laddie, good morning to you as well. Hello, hello. Halford and Bruff in the morning is brought to you by Sands and Associates. Learn how a consumer proposal could get you on the road to being debt-free in just two weeks. Visit them online at sands-trustee.com. We are an hour one of the program.

Hour 1 is brought to you by North Star Metal Recycling. Vancouver's premier metal recycler pays the highest prices on scrap metal. North Star Metal Recycling, they recycle you get paid. Visit them at 1170 Powell Street in Vancouver. We are coming to you live live live live from the Kintech Studio, make 2026 year-year to move better and step stronger with Kintech custom orthotics. It is time now for our daily guest list, the morning rundown, the Duick Morning Drive, brought to you by the Duick Auto Group.

It begins at 630. Aaron Portsline is going to join the program. Columbus Blue Jackets writer for the athletic. The Canucks are in Columbus tonight to wrap up this dismal six-game road swing. This will also be the second game in charge for new Columbus Blue Jackets head coach, Rick Bonas. Former Canucks friendly face. We'll talk to Aaron Portsline about all this at 630. 7 o'clock Patrick Johnston's going to join the program.

I don't believe we've ever had Pige on the show before. Yeah, he's been exclusive to other shows, and so we're just going to steal him away from those. Just once. Just once. Just once. That's why you have to listen today. Just once. Just one time only kind of thing. Canucks writer for the province, also the author of the new book, Gino, the fighting spirit of Gino Ogic. Pige also had an interview with Canucks, President of Hockey Ops, Jim Rutherford, talking about the rebuild. So we've got a lot to talk about with Patrick Johnson from the province.

That's 7 o'clock this morning. 730, Brady Henderson, our Seahawks insider from ESPN is going to join the program. this Saturday 5 o'clock Seattle hosts San Fran in one of the two NFC divisional round games. The winner, of course, will advance to face the winner of the Rams bear game. That one is being played Sunday afternoon. We will preview the biggest football game in Seattle in I would say at least a decade with Brady at 7.30 this morning.

8 o'clock Thomas Drance from the Athletic and Kinnock's Talk is going to join us here on Sportsnet 650. Old Jim Rutherford's been a chatty man this week. We mentioned he's spoken with our 7 a.m. guest, Patrick Johnson. He also did his seemingly weekly check-in with the Globe of Mail's Gary Mason. Lots to chew on from Brotherford about the rebuild, which players will be made available for trade. How long he has left on the job as president of hockey ops? Thomas Trance is going to join us at 8 o'clock to talk about all that.

A big guest list, a big show ahead. I'm not even going to run it in reverse. Without further ado, Laddie, let's tell everybody what happened. Hey, did you guys see the game last night? No. No, what happened? I missed all the action because I'm not. We know how busy your life can be. What happened?

You missed that? What happened is Bratseye of I, the BC Construction Safety Alliance. Making safety simpler by giving construction companies to best in tools, resources, and safety training. Visit them online at BCCSA.ca.com. As I mentioned in the rundown, Canucks president of hockey ops Jim Rutherford, he was a chatty man over the last 24 to 48 hours, speaking with both the province's Patrick Johnson and the Globe of Males, Gary Mason, about the rebuild. Jason. Yeah, and I think my, if there's a lot of stuff that's coming at us in terms of quotes for us to parse through. And I'm going to let Halford go through some of the things that Jim Rutherford said

to various people. But I think the main point of all this, and we've had some people texting in asking, do you think this is a precursor to some sort of big trade? I mean, maybe. But to me, the main idea is that this is no longer a hybrid rebuild. Rest in peace, hybrid rebuild. The hybrid rebuild lasted for how long it was, what, during the wind streak? Three weeks. Three weeks? Was it about three weeks?

If we're going to officially declare the time of death as yesterday, then I'd say it got a good three week run as being a thing. I know Pierre LeBron was on another radio station in Canada and said that and this is kind of a damning report, if it's true, said that, you know, after the Canucks traded Quinn Hughes, remember they won a few games. Four in a row. Then at that point, the team was kind of like, maybe we can pull off this hybrid rebuild. But then recently, I don't know if you've been watching the Canucks, but they've been bad.

Yeah. And they have lost eight straight games. They've lost all five games of this current road trip. Tell you what they don't have as a hybrid win Yeah, last eight years. Well, they don't, I mean, if you want to call like getting to overtime and getting a point, a hybrid win, they don't even have that on this road trip.

So, so I think if there was, if there's one thing that I believe that it seems like that the team wanted to get across is like, you know, we're listening on anybody. So there aren't guys that they're necessarily. they're going to be like, no. This guy is untouchable here. Shocking.

The 32nd place team in the NHL does not have any untouchable players. Now, where I still, I don't know, I just, you know, I hope it happens, but I don't see how, is when Jim Rutherford says he thinks this rebuild will take two to three years. Because he openly acknowledges that the center position is the big. area of weakness. In the center position, Elias Pedersen, Philip Edel, if you want to still consider him, and Marco Rossi,

who they got in the Quinn Hughes trade. So those are your top three guys, and maybe you got Braden Coutes coming as well, right? So in two to three years, has that changed so significantly that the Canucks are now a playoff contender or even

like a Stanley Cup contender? How, How would that, how would that change? Okay, well, let's wind it back a sec here, just to give everyone an idea of exactly what Jim Rutherford says. But that's kind of at the top of my head right now. We'll go with that one right away. Like the timeline to me still seems wildly aggressive. So the most detailed rundown of Jim Rutherford's timeline came courtesy

the Patrick Johnson piece in the province, which you can read. It's online right now. It's a little bit of a like-their quote here that I've chosen. I will try and read it as quickly as possible. but also with clarity so you can hear it all. With regards to the current timeline in the two to three year window that Jason Brough is talking about, Jim Rutherford said the following,

we've got to have the patience of living through where we are presently, being cautious in what is being moved and what's the return. Continue to stick to either getting young players, 25 or younger, or getting draft picks. There are deals out there that could make our team better today but does it work for us over a three-year period? I would like to think that based on the number of young players that we have, that we've been able to pick up over the last few years with high ceiling,

that this rebuild can take two to three years, not six to ten. So who are those high-ceiling players? Braden Coots, Zeev Boullium. Who else? High-cealing? I think I've run through the list. Yeah, I would agree with you. Now, you know, I think maybe DPD could be a pretty good player.

I don't know how high his ceiling is. Tom Vlander. Ditto. Yeah. But, but again. Liam Ogren. Come on. Down the middle.

Down the middle. What are you looking at? Braden Coots. Yeah. So how are you going to, in this draft, by the way, which is not considered particularly chock full of centers, especially in the top five or the top ten. You know, McKenna's a winger, Stembourg's a winger. So how do you, how?

I just, like he, okay, so when Rutherford won a Stanley Cup in Carolina, his two centers were Eric Stahl, who was really young at the time. And it was unbelievable. Very good. And a very highly touted draft pick. And Rod Brindamor, who he'd picked up in a trade. Right? Okay, so you've got, I think Brindamore should be in the Hall of Fame. The guy won a Selke. Like you had, you had, I think he won, they won the Stanley Cup in 2006, and I think Brindamore won the Selke in 06 and 07. Okay. And plus you had Eric Stahl, who was, you know, an automatic for Team Canada when he was in his prime.

They had very good centers. Okay. They had even better centers in Pittsburgh. Yes. They had Sidney Crosby and Jenny Malkin. And then they actually picked up a pretty good center in a trade with the Canucks and they got Nick Benino and put that line together. Right. So that's kind of the bar. Two to three years.

How are you doing that? Well, Jason, if you listen further to Jim Rutherford, the rebuild didn't just start the other day. As a matter of fact, Jim Rutherford would argue that the rebuild might have started a couple of years. ago. So in his interview with Gary Mason, this time, this one's in the Globe of Mail if you want to check that out, Jim Rutherford said in what could possibly, and I just want to throw it out there, possibly be construed as revisionist history, the rebuild that the Kinecks are currently in has actually been going underway for a little while. To me, Jim Rutherford said, the clock actually started two or three years ago because we have very good young goalies in the

system, and now we have very good young defensemen. These are the two positions that are hard to build, and we're already ahead of the rebuild before the clock started, including the Quinn Hughes trade. So there you have. Does no other team in the league make draft picks, you know, like the Kinex are the only ones? Not like this. The Kinex are the only ones that have been making draft picks for the last few years and picking up some, the odd young player here and there.

I appreciate it. So every team in the NHL has actually been rebuilding this whole time. Everyone's rebuilding. Maybe. Everyone, it's a bold way of looking at it. All 32 teams are in a rebuild. Every time you go to the draft stage and you call out an 18-year-old guy's name. You're rebuilding.

You're rebuilding right there. You don't even know it until you draft them. This is the type of spin that kind of bugs me. I'll be honest with you. It's just like, yeah, you know, there was some more spin in the Gary Mason article where he kind of throws up his hands in the air and says, well, there was nothing we could have done above. Quinn Hughes leaving.

You won't convince me of that. You won't convince me that if the Canucks had been rolling along, that Quinn Hughes, the captain of the team, would have said, I still want out. I still want to go back east. I'm sorry, you won't convince me of that. And there were some comments from Hughes' agent at the time when Hughes was traded, where he said, listen, we wouldn't be having this conversation if the team wasn't

struggling. Like I'm paraphrasing there. But so like you just this doesn't happen. Quinn Hughes wanted to play for a winning team. Yeah, he might have also wanted to go back east, maybe go down to the States, be closer to his family,

sure. But if the Canucks were rolling along like they were a couple of years ago, that continued and there hadn't been the feud between Miller and Pedersen that forces a trade of J.T. Miller and everything looked rosy. Queen Hughes would still be a member of the Vancouver Cadux.

Well, there's been some differing of opinions. I won't say revisionist history, but differing opinions about how that whole process went down because Jim Brotherford, again, to Gary Mason in the Globe and Mailpiece, did say that in the end it was a desire to play with his brothers or at least play somewhere in the east that became the biggest factor in Hughes' decision to leave. Now, I'm kind of past that part.

I think the continual harping on what's already transpired is a fruitless endeavor because what's done is done the trade has been consummated. Queen Hughes is no longer a member of the Vancouver Connect. And quite frankly, what's on the horizon is far more interesting than what's already happened, right? But it does matter because credibility is at stake. But that shot already.

Not with everyone. Not with everyone. Look, we got a text into the Dunbar Lumber Text land. We got a lot of texts coming in. What's the text? So here's the text. I don't think the timeline matters too much. That was when I was talking about the two to three years.

I think the most important thing is someone has convinced ownership to rebuild. It took several presidents slash general managers losing their jobs. Are you sure? Are you absolutely sure that, you know, maybe six months or a year down the line, the Canucks maybe managed to win a few in a row, and all of a sudden, wait a minute, we're back to a hybrid rebuild. Well, like the plan changes, not year to year. Honestly, in the last little while, it's been month to month.

Think of how many times the plan has changed. We came into the season. The plan was keep Quinn Hughes, right? You add some players like Vander Cain, oh, that's a rebuilding move, throwing on a draft pick for Van der Cain. You bring in a Quinn Hughes friendly coach, apparently, in Adam Foote. you resign Brock Bessor, you re-sign Thatcher Demko,

totally rebuilding moves. Trade for a Vanderkane. And then, oh, well, I mentioned that already. Oh, sorry. And then all of a sudden, it's okay, you can mention it twice. And then all of a sudden, Quinn, that doesn't work. And then you trade him, and people are like, well, that was a pretty good return you got.

Because you got some NHL players, and then the team has a few good results. You know, high PDO results, but results all the same. And it's a hybrid rebuild. And then the team goes really in the tank. Like one of the lowest points we've, this road trip is one of the lowest points. Let's face it in Canucks history in terms of play. Yep.

They've been awful. Not good. And then all the damage control goes out ahead of an eight game homestand where it's like, actually, yeah, we will listen to all the players. Because, you know, there's a lot of people, you know, not just media, but fans that are like, I don't like anyone on this team. Trade everyone, right? And then all of a sudden they reflect that in their words.

If you want to ask me why I think they did all these media avails, is because the fan base is freaking out, and they kind of had to change their messaging a little bit. The messaging, so how many times has the messaging change in one season? A few, to put it, maybe underscore, how many? I'd say a few. Let's say though, Jason, for sake of argument, just for sake of argument,

that everything that was said over the last 24 to 48 hours is on the up and up and it's legitimate and that Jim Rutherford is convinced the ownership that this rebuild is the way to go. Okay, let's just, let's take it at face value. Okay? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. Instead of trying to poke holes in the

legitimacy of the statement, I think there's another thing that could throw more doubt into it. And that is the fact, that Jim Rutherford turned 77 next month and in this same article with Gary Mason did not offer the most optimistic view of how much longer he would be on the job. So the guy that is convinced ownership to do this

said the following. Eventually, I will have to do what's best for my family, but also what's best for the Canucks. I'm committed to this rebuild. I'm committed to this job today and as long as I'm here. Then he was asked how long that is, and if he was committed to next season. Rutherford said, as we speak, yes I am. Mason then went on to write, but beyond that, he said he didn't know.

I think he honestly doesn't know what the future holds for him even beyond this season. And then Gary Mason concluded it by saying, if I'm betting, he's not going to be holding his current job in three years time, that would be asking a lot. So for Canucks fans out there, this two to three year window, I think it means a lot. I think it means a lot to Rutherford because I think he might see that as the legitimate endpoint of his tenure as the president of hockey. And he doesn't want to leave the team like this. He does not want to leave the team mid rebuild, I would guess. He would like to be near the end of the rebuild.

And that's where you get a two to three year timeline for it. It all spells itself out pretty straightforward. I will say this about Jim Rutherford in this time here, is that when, When he's rolling and he's candid, he'll give you pretty much everything you want to hear. There's not a topic he won't discuss and won't give you something to chew on. And his media folk, it's great. The only issue is kind of what you pointed out earlier. There's a lot of messaging.

And sometimes it's contradictory. Sometimes it changes. And sometimes it leaves you saying, hmm, I heard what he said. I still wonder what the future has in store. A lot of texts coming in Good Austin and Langley Ownership isn't convinced to rebuild

They were literally trying to make the playoffs And win for Quinn But they managed to put together The worst team in the league And to save face They are calling it a rebuild There was another comment from Jim Rutherford About

This is the year To be bad Which I'm just like Desperate for the follow-up question what about next year? Where are the expectations? And now you can say that two to three year, you already said it.

It's a two to three year rebuild. I don't think they're tanking for two years. I don't think they're tanking for three years. He did say, he did say, and I thought this was maybe the most important quote from an optimistic point of view, is that they're going to improve this team without taking shortcuts.

Now, you're very well aware of this, and I'm sure many of the listeners are, for the last 10 years, the Canucks have loved a shortcut. If there was a way to trim something off the route. They've said that before, though. They've said it before. They said, you can't win with shortcuts,

and then they continually take shortcuts. Right, but we have to take the... No, we don't. We don't have to take them at face value. No, you have to... I mean, we're talking about an article that was written yesterday and the quotes that were provided.

You have to say the quotes. You have to say that, at the very least, he has acknowledged that there have been shortcuts taken in the past and they haven't worked. And that if they're going to do this properly, there can't be any shortcuts. You're absolutely right to question the legitimacy and the long-term nature of this

because sometimes, and I don't know if you guys are aware of this or not, sometimes the Kinnocks have gone about a regular path of business and then thought, what if we could speed this up a little bit? What if we could change this? Or something happens.

Yeah. Something happens. And it deviates the plan. Yeah. And I know that there's a lot of, lot of texts coming in and I know people are very, very skeptical. And that's putting it mildly of the Kinecks being able to carry out this plan. My biggest concern right now, speaking just purely as myself and not projecting any of the,

you know, what the fans are saying right now, I'd be very concerned about the role that Rutherford's going to play in all this. Because what's being said right now is the right messaging and it's what you want to hear but not only are you casting doubt on its legitimacy, I'm not 100% certain that he's even going to be around next year. I'm not. Yeah. Because things change so quickly for this organization.

And he's, he's, is Patrick Galvin going to be the GM next season? That was not addressed in either of the pieces, which I thought was interesting. Because I think that's, look, if you want to talk about moves that they can make to,

I don't know, sell hope, bringing a new GM, bringing a new head coach. You bring in a guy like Mani Mahaltra, and you're like, this guy's a teacher.

He's going to teach all the young guys. He's a high character guy. And I wouldn't even disagree with that. I'd be like, yeah, not a bad move. Or you could bring in another GM and say, this guy's a really forward-thinking type of guy.

We went on head-hunted this guy. This guy's smart. He knows what course he is or something like that. I don't know. You know? He gets it all. He gets it all. He understands it all.

And maybe that's a move you can make. That can restore some hope. I just think about the guys, the season ticket sales guys, who are calling up people right now and people are like, what? What are you guys doing? Yeah. What are you guys doing? What's the plan?

Because there are season ticket holders that will say, like, like I'll keep buying tickets but I need some clarity of vision from you in order to know what I'm getting it like I don't need, I'll buy tickets if the team has some young players in the lineup next season and we can start growing our relationship together, fan base and players

and I'll enjoy that process. I like hockey, you know? I want to buy these tickets. Yeah. That's the thing. The season ticket holders, They do want to buy, they want a reason to buy these tickets. It's not like, it's not like they hate hockey. And they have to be sold super hard on this stuff.

Yeah, it's a lot of money, but a lot of the season ticket holders, they got money or their companies, right? But right now, I'd be like, well, what am I signing up for? Because at the beginning of the season, it was completely different. And it's been two years now of, first of all, bad hockey from the And I'm watching a bunch of guys that are fairly well paid, not playing well. So you tell me, it's a clarity of vision. I would say that's what everyone needs right now.

And I don't think we have it because he says we'll listen on guys. But he doesn't say he'll trade them. Like to me, Elias Pedersen is still the number one topic. because if you talk about he openly acknowledge we need to improve our center group if you trade Elias Pedersen away and you're not going to get like a top center back

in any trade for him then you've made that even harder so are you going to keep him then remains to be seen like you can say we'll listen on players well I can I can you know anyone can listen you can pick up the phone and be like

I won't hang it up it doesn't mean you're going to trade him. You know, I think a better thing would have been like, yeah, we're going to trade some of these guys. He didn't commit to really anything when it came to the veterans. The line was we may end up saying no to offers, certainly, but we're not going to say no to having conversations about any player. Great.

You're listening to the best of Halford and Brough. You're listening to the best of Halford and Brough. Thomas Drance joins us now. on the Halford and Brough Show on Sports 9650. What up, Drancer? Good morning, gentlemen. It was quite the quote dump from President of Hockey Ops, Jim Rutherford yesterday. Across two platforms.

One, Patrick Johnson of the province, who wrote his article shortly thereafter, Gary Mason of the Globe and Mail, who wrote his article. A lot of different material to parse through from Jim Rutherford, the president of hockey ops. I know it's a lot, and I know there's a lot to go through. But what was your biggest takeaway? Was there? one big takeaway from everything that Jim Rutherford

had to say yesterday to these various outlets. I think it was one of those days where, I mean, look, the news on the ice

for the Canucks is as grim as a guess, right? We're talking about a team that's lost eight in a row. We're talking about a team

that actually, like, tonight in Columbus, kind of needs to win. Otherwise, they'll be playing for history,

right, the opportunity to match the franchise's longest losing streak it ever. On home against Connor McDavid. I mean, that's, like, I know the results don't matter, but you want to win

tonight. Like, you want to win tonight for sure to avoid the scene that could unfold on Saturday and again, when the, when the capitals visit, you know, in the event that they lose. So I think that's context. Like, I really do think back-to-back losses in Canadian markets on Monday and Tuesday, and then on Wednesday, it's like the Canucks have flooded the zone with, so many different takes, admissions. The big picture of it, I think, is just that things are getting more dramatic in terms of what the club is prepared to consider now than what they were prepared to consider prior to this losing streak.

And that's good because the Canucks needed to get here, in my opinion, but it's also unnerving because wire results helping the Canucks get here, right? Like, you trade Quinn Hughes, you'd hope to do it with a more suburb. stand and plan than retooling in a hybrid state. Oh, we lost eight in a row, predictably, by the way, now we have to consider something more grand. Now we have to listen on everybody. I mean, before Christmas, what I was hearing, both from team sources and league sources, were, you know, the hybrid nature of the label meant to infer that the Kinnucks weren't going to go that deep in terms of trading their vets. And what Rutherford told Patrick Johnston and Gary

Mason yesterday is it's totally different than that. The timeline went from a couple of years to two to three years. So the timeline got pushed out a little bit longer. Any, any thought of hybrids is out the window. I mean, I saw a brough of your tweet yesterday, right? The hybrid rebuild or retool from 2005, like born 2005, died 2006. No, born 226 also died in 2006. It had a good run. It died young, but it lived a full life, and it got a lot of attention. It's the shortest era of Canucks history ever, right?

Three weeks. Yeah. So, I mean, I think the unnerving part to me about all of that, right? And I've come away from yesterday of two minds, right, where I'm happy about the content. I think this team should have been prepared to go far more dramatically into a future forward team building posture three years ago. So for me, this is welcome. But the concern that really stems for me from the balance of Rutherford's commentary and from my effort to, you know, try and like parse it individually and pull out what really matters is that it seems reactive. okay and it's reactive from a general manager who in talking with mason or sorry not a general manager

president of hockey ops who in talking with gary mason was not a hundred percent committal that he'd be back for next season right he was he was optimistic that he would be but not a hundred percent committal and and wouldn't discuss his future with the franchise beyond twenty twenty seven put a timeline on the rebuild that extends beyond that, right? And you sort of take those facts in line with the moving goalposts of Vancouver's timeline and the drama with which they'll bring the description of their team building posture. And it tells me this story, gentlemen, and this story sends chills down my spine. It tells me the story that the success or failure

the hopes for the future of hockey in Vancouver ultimately hinge less on their draft slot in 2026, less on their player development, less on their coaching, and even less, frankly, on their hockey operations leadership than it does on Canucks ownership. And whether or not this time, right, they're going to be able to have the wisdom to stick with a plan, have the wisdom to be patient, have the wisdom to look not at timelines or descriptions, or the idea that, well,

it's been long enough for our fans, and just do the right thing. Do the right thing. Come up with a process-oriented way of viewing this team, stick to it, right? Succession plan. Like, that's one of the things that also comes out to me from that article,

or those pair of articles. All that Jim Rutherford commentary yesterday was, is this ownership group 100% locked in that if Jim Rutherford were to retire beyond this season, next season or the season after, that Patrick Calvin would take over? Like, are they 100% locked into that? Because most people in the industry don't think they would be.

And if they're not, then they might want to go about identifying that person now. You don't want to be changing gears. You don't want to be changing racehorses in the middle of a rebuild? Like this is a critical next two, three years for the Canucks. I want to see some planning. I want to see some vision.

And we're effectively going to be trusting, you know, a Canucks ownership group as the primary stewards of this rebuild when history tells us that they're the most reluctant rebuilders in the entire league. That's my main takeaway from yesterday, gentlemen. Dranser, I always come back to this topic, but I think it's important. It's all well and good to trade pending unrestricted free agents like Kiefer Sherwood, which they still haven't done, but they got time to do that. Yeah, yeah.

And I'm not particularly worried about that. What I'm wondering about is are they committed to trading some of these veterans with term? And there's quite a few of them because it's easy to say we'll listen on anyone. You know, like that's almost obvious too. It's like, yeah, you pick up the phone or what are you going to scream if they name someone and hang up the phone? Like, you know, of course, of course

Yeah, right, it's like, ah, like, you know, and then hang up. It will be bad. Right? Of course you're going to listen on any player, but my question is, is have they gotten to the point like I think a lot of fans have

is like, we've got to do this. Like we got to ship some of these guys out. We got to cut bait. I don't want to see a lot of these guys back next season. Oh, man. Yeah. I mean, that is a different point. What I've heard is that to this point,

their veteran players have been bought in in terms of working with the younger players in terms of trying to keep as upbeat an attitude as possible. You know, I think until Ottawa and Montreal, frankly, I hadn't seen any signs either that the club's effort level had significantly flagged. I thought there were signs of that, though, in Montreal and Ottawa.

and that might change the conversation too. And I'd also sort of heard that, you know, there'd been no additional, like, guys asking out or reading the writing on the wall here. So that's sort of what I'd heard earlier this week was effectively that the club was pretty content with the fact that the vets had to this point bought into the new direction,

and there'd been no further requests. So, you know, they're listening, and we'll see where this goes. where again, sometimes it makes more sense to look at the fundamentals as opposed to focusing on what's said. And I mean, I was saying this during the four-game win streak before Christmas that in the wake of Quinn Hughes, the Quinn Hughes trade, I thought they were clearly the 32nd most talented team in the league. And I thought that, you know, the truth is, in my opinion, is that they're going to be in and around one of the worst teams in hockey from a true talent

standpoint for years, like for multiple years here. And, and, you know, you can say two to three years, you can say however you want, I think the Canucks would be underdogs. Like, I don't think the Canucks will be even money to make the playoffs in the next five years, right? Like, that's, that's what's coming here. And the truth is, is that this type of losing, this type of level of performance has its own gravity, right?

Like, it has its own gravity and will dictate how some of this unfolds, including with their veteran players. It's one thing to endure a month of losing. It's another to endure 14. Right? And at some point, you know, however settled people are in Vancouver,

however much their family likes it, however reluctant the Canucks are to consider it, these conversations are going to shift around some of these veteran players in the years ahead. And, you know, that's part of what has to probably be done. We're talking about a team with eight guys,

eight guys. Pedersen, the three-wingers, Debrusk, Bessor, and Garland, right? Marcus Pedersin, plus Philiparoni, plus the two goaltenders, Lankin and Demko. Those are eight players, right? A third of the roster, a third of the 23-man roster, who are, you know, late, frankly, like Pedersen would be the youngest of that group. They're late 20s. They're signed for a long time. Lots of term combined on those deals. big money and all of them have some variety of no move or no trade gloss. And at some point, I would expect many of them would be welcome or would welcome the opportunity to go play for a team that has a chance to compete.

And these deals are not going to be quick. You know, you're not going to be able to take care of five of those eight trades before the deadline. If you can get one done before the deadline, I'd say, well done, good, let's go. That's progress. To be totally honest with you, this is going to be a multi-year. project and the feelings of those players and their appetite for this is going to diminish over time. And that's going to be something that the Canucks have to manage. And I'd like to see them manage it proactively without sentimentality, like without sort of

being attached to the idea that, well, we need Philopronic to, you know, make sure that whatever, right? It's like, Tyler Myers can do that. You know, Tyler Myers can do that and he won't return you the same amount in a trade. But, you know, Marcus Pedersen, we need him to play some tough minutes for us. And it's like, yeah, you know what? He's an awesome practice player. Like, he's a good pro.

I get all that. But also, like, if you need to throw PO Joseph to the wolves to make sure that Zeeb Bouillon is playing softer minutes while he, you know, gains confidence, fine. Like, who cares? We don't care. This is going to be a multi-year strategic project and it has to be built around maximizing the Kinex's value in monetizing this group of play. some of whose value is highly complicated as a result of their contractual situation. So, you know, that to me is the only way to view this. And do I think the Canucks are there 100% of the way?

I don't. But I do think they're getting there. And I do think the organization will get there. And I do think the players will get there too. Because, again, the fundamental of the situation is that the Canucks are in a really bad spot in terms of even being able to be one of those teams that can make the playoffs if everything goes their way. they're a bottom end team

and they're going to be a bottom end team for a while here and that's going to change how everyone feels about this over time so I'm not too worried about like are they are they sick of this it's like they will be and that's the that's sort of what's coming

I just like to see them put a plan in place for that obvious eventuality now and begin to work with sort of the idea of value monetization front of mind are all these guys tradable though well everyone's tradable, Jason,

Roberto Longo got traded. Scott Gomez got traded. I mean, I've never seen a contract so toxic that it can't be moved. To be totally honest with you. I really, like, you know, think about the worst contract that we've seen in Vancouver across the last 10 years, and it would have been Oliver Ekman-Larsen, right? Yeah, but look at what it costs the Canucks to...

Well, that's what it costs because they decided to buy him out because they decided to extend Kuzmanko and decided to trade for Anthony Bo Villiers and make the Bo Hormat trade cap neutral, and they decided to trade for Philip Oronick at the time. I mean, there's million ways that you could have ridden that contract out. You wouldn't have had the 20, 23, 24 season. But, I mean, if you were focused on the long term, you could have ridden that contract out.

And today, Oliver Ekman-Larson would have a year and a half. Given the way that his form has rebounded, you're telling me you couldn't move that contract with 2 million retained. You're telling me teams wouldn't today be willing to pay you assets to get $5 million dollars worth of Oliver Rekman-Larsen for a year and a half? Like, that's what I'm talking about, right? Like, even the contracts that look brutal today, right? I'd say Demko and Besser today, by the way, both contracts signed very recently.

Both signed July 1st. Those would be the two that, like, you'd look at today and be like, ooh, I don't know, right? Their value, too, will fluctuate, right? I mean, as much as Demko seems to be averaging an injury every eight games right now, if he gives you 30 games of 9-10 goal-tending in the last year of that deal or the second of last year of that deal or honestly even next year

I mean given his pedigree given his reputation that's a very different conversation than the one we're having today so wait strike when the iron's hot resuscitate value you know in Bessor's case like my view of it anyway is I think if you are able to over the next two years draft or maybe it's Marco Rossi or whatever

like if you're able to get him consistent center play, I mean, why couldn't he be seen as Tyler Tafoli around the league? I mean, there's no reason for it. There's no reason why he couldn't be seen that way. If he's playing the net front constantly and reminding people how good he is in that spot, how good he is as a screener, he is a clutch goal scorer. Like, that is just true. You have a six on five at a big money situation. Like, you want Brock Besser on the ice. There are things that Besser does really well despite, you know, the speed and the fact that he's enduring a nightmare stretch right now. Like, Besser, let's not overreact to our current reality. Besser is still a, you know, top six at worst and probably top line complementary winger with some foot speed issues, but also

with some defensive know-how. I mean, that's not a bad profile, even at 7.3 million. But if you're going to, like, you know, if you're thinking about the wingers, it's like Garland would probably have the, or DeBrusk would probably have the most value now because his speed makes him sort of universally like rated. Plus he's got the playoff pedigree. Garland would kind of be second, but

there's teams that would rate him the highest and teams that would have very little interest, a little bit polarized. Besser would probably have the lowest value. It's like, there you go. That's your priority. That's your priority list. You keep the one that's valued least and try over the next couple years to find him a center

and try to resuscitate that value and have a different conversation, right? When, first of all, 7.3 million matters less against the cap. And when, you know, he's back to looking like a guy who can score 25 goals for you and be a impact player and clutch moments and at the net front, that shouldn't be impossible to do. Besser's not, Besser is a useful player. Yeah, he's a good player. He's a good player. He is. He really is. And so it's like, you just have to think through things in terms of value and time. And time is one of the best assets that the Canucks have. Like,

every single trade that we've ever seen at the NHL trade deadline is one team using their ability to be patient, right? As an arbitrage factor, generating value for them in combat with, frankly, a team that has urgency, competitive urgency to win now.

Like, that's, time is one of Vancouver's best friends right now. You know, and that's why, too, like, don't get caught up on the timeline thing. Like the timeline, I actually don't want to hear anything about the timeline.

I want to hear about a team starting to commit to doing things right, not doing them quick. Patience is the key to all of this. And it's funny because Bruff and I had this conversation earlier in the week and we're like instinctually, and I think maybe like from an emotional standpoint, we want everything to happen now. Clear the decks, get rid of everyone. Move, move, move, move. Because. When's the next draft pick you own in our dynasty league, Halford, like four years from now?

Right. That's how I operate, right? You mean the defending champ? He won. He won. My future is grim, and I won. Drance, I told him to leave the league. Right. Now there is that option.

Canna Cucs quit the NHL? No. Back to our original point here. But I kind of had like an inflection moment when we were talking about it. I'm like, the patience that we've often chided the Canucks for not having, they need to have now at a moment where the critics Halperdon Brough are yelling for changes. Like, it can't go on like this. Guys need to move.

We need symbolic gestures that the rebuild is. Well, I am worried about the experience for the young players. So I'm interested in hearing more about what Trance had to say about the veteran players buying in. and, you know, being willing to be upbeat and positive and enthusiastic and willing to go and teach some of these young players. And I seriously question whether, well, a few of them, well, especially one, is willing to do that. Yeah, I mean, look, it's fair. It's fair to question.

I would say that I thought the team seemed very down on this road trip. when I was around them, especially relative to the vibes in New York, which were high. So, you know, for what it's worth, this stuff gets harder too, right? Like, it's one thing to do it in the wake of the trade when you're winning some games and, you know, telling that you're able to say or tell a story to yourself that it's like, okay, we're not as good, we don't have as much talent, but we're more of a team, right? And, you know, every season, it's going to be about finding that. You know, in terms of who's coaching this team, it's going to be about finding that.

and driving it home and finding a baseline level where you can be a tough out night to night. You know, like that's that's part of what you're going to have to do. I mean, the Boston Bruins to me are a really good example this season where they've found that that way they've found it. Like they've found that story to tell and they've sustained that, well, we're a team that does this sort of baseline level of performance and they're doing it while, you know, continuing to educate and integrate young players. Fraser Minton and Merritt Kusnadina and on and on that they picked up.

But, you know, for me anyway, it's like that was not the case last season. You've never seen a more aggressive tank job in season than you've seen from the Boston Bruins, right? Like they were shutting everyone down, Mason Lurray playing top top pair minutes. And by the way, he was awful in those minutes. He's a young defender, like a promising young defender. And they just absolutely threw him to the wolves and let him get torn asunder. He's, he's bounced back.

He's fine. Like, he's playing well this year. He's fine. It didn't ruin him. It didn't ruin him. No, like, but I mean, at one point, they were, they were, they picked up like two points in a 20-game stretch. Like, they had a worse 20-game stretch than the Connector enduring right now. But, you know, it helped them get up to seventh. It helped them get James Huggins when he fell.

Like, and I think more than anything, though, it's the volume of moves that they were able to make. And some of them with no trade clauses, but it was like Brazil out for, you know, obviously, Brandon Carlo had term and money. Charlie Coil had multiple years. I mean, they went deep. They made like six different rebuilding trades. And so for me anyway, I think in terms of being impatient with the Canucks from a, from a fan perspective, other than the global impatience of being like, oh, now you're going to rebuild,

now that you've traded the only guy that really matters and would have been worth rebuilding around three years ago, right? Which is fair, by the way. I think the, I think what is reasonable. to look at is just like how aggressively do teams in similar situations begin to move and the truth

is that they tend to move pretty aggressively like very aggressively I would say a baseline reasonable expectation to say okay this is beginning to move in the right direction would be like Sherwood with a good return a van der Kaine with a decent return

whatever else you can monetize like David Kemp, Teddy Bluger for whatever, absolutely no thought to being like well, you know, we're not just going to give the guy away. It's like, no, just give him away. Give him away. And I would say one

of the vets. Find a way to get one of the vets off the roster before the deadline. One of that group of eight. And I would look at that and say that's a decent start. That's a decent start. And if you could get two vets, I would say that's a good start. Right? And that's kind of for me, like where we're at. It's going to take

a while for this to bear fruit. Like the patience that's going to be required is significant. But it's less significant. It's less about the fan base tolerating this because how could you possibly? Then it is about the organization recognizing that they're not owed anything. They're not owed anything here. Right. Like trust with the fans in your process has to be one back, right?

That the timeline, the right to accelerate, that has to be big. built because you've amassed enough of sort of a critical group of like six to eight high-end prospects that actually give you a shot to accelerate without, you know, cutting one of your legs out from under you. Like that's nothing is due to this franchise. They have to proceed with that in mind. And in terms of sort of the patience from the fan base itself, like I'm pretty confident that you would have a reaction, much like Kent Hughes and Jeff Gordon were able to enjoy

in Montreal over the past few years. where you were obviously making smart moves, right? Your team was obviously scrappy and undermanned, but they played a certain way and they were all bought in and they maintained a not playoff level, but credible level of effort night after night

and were predictable about that effort and you got to see some young players developing. Like, if you're serving up that product, it's not going to be great. It's not going to capture the imaginations of fans, but your hardcore fans and some casuals too will stand by you. you need to get yourself to that level.

It's not about the market. You're not owed anything. Go earn it. Drancer, excellent as always. Thanks for doing this, but enjoy the football this week and we'll do this again next week. Thanks, boys. Cheers.

Bye. Thomas Dr. Trans from the Athletic Vancouver here on the Halford & Breff show on Sportsnet 650. I could not agree more with Dranser about. You're not owed anything. The fans are going to be mad. There's a lot of residual anger. Go earn it.

Go earn the credibility. You've lost it. You've got to get it back. You're listening to the best of Haliffer. Alfred and Brough.