OverDrive - Johnson on McKenna's patient approach, Bobrovsky's outlook and Hellebuyck's future

Episode Date: October 6, 2026

TSN Hockey Analyst Mike Johnson joined OverDrive to discuss the Maple Leafs and Predators' matchup, Gavin McKenna's start to the season and how his linemates need to carry him, the team's goaltending tandem and Sergei Bobrovsky's games outlook, Connor Hellebuyck's future in Winnipeg, the no-trade clause viewpoints and more.

Let's bring in Mike Johnson. Here's Mike Johnson, our TSN Hockey analyst, joining us here on the Maple Toyota Hotline, little diss or dad out of the gate, basically, with Johnny. Right, Johnny? How do you balance that? Like, everyone likes the stats, Marchenko and Matthews, but if they're not actually scoring goals,

what type of value do we place in it? Well, I think you have to say, over the course of 84 games, if they have a 70% expected goal rate, they're not going to be even-stevening goals. right like it's going to get better over 84 games any group of players let alone ones that has the challenge this one is not shooting six and a half percent at five on five they won't they just absolutely will not they won't ring seven posts and miss so you're right haze and like as a former player you don't want to hear about well good process night tonight boys if you lost four one and you got nothing done like you want to you need to score to be rewarded for the good work but if you're the coach if you're the management you're taking a larger scale view of things you're things, that's why you like the first line. That's why you like the third line.

That's not, and that's why you dislike the second line, because over the course of time, unless something very strange happens, the numbers should regulate, and they'll get the results commensurate with the good play. Johnny, what stats do you think are a little bit overblown, the positive numbers for the top line or the negative numbers for the second line? That's a good one.

I would say the positive numbers, yeah, I probably would say the positive numbers for the first line, because they haven't felt dominant. They felt good. Marchenko's been really good and Austin's been good, but they haven't been great, but their numbers would suggest, like sort of dominant play,

and it hasn't really felt like that. So, you know, you look at the numbers and all the expected goals and slot shots and shot differential, all these things are at the top of the league, but doesn't feel like they've been the best line in the league, even if it's just three games. So I would say the top line, oh,

with your good question, was probably overblown. I think they're buoyed because Willie did a couple things in game one sort of on his own jumping off the bench and dancing in for a snipe. I think that one sort of is reflective of how they're playing and the concerns with them. This or data? Thank you, JP, where this is what this segment is about a lot.

Johnny, William Neelander said there shouldn't be any offensive expectations on Gavin McKenna. Do you want to just calm the masses here and set this straight? what are reasonable expectations and what do you do with this scenario regarding the second line where he's the number one overall pick everyone's kind of staring at him waiting for a goal waiting for production waiting for points the line is struck like just give it to all of us the second line what do you do with mckenna like the patience level the best spot for him all of it so multiple things to be true at the same time right like i don't think the struggles of the second line fall to McKenna.

They fall to Willie and then to JT and then to Gavin McKenna. He's the least experienced and the least responsible that they would count on to drive the line. So I would say that part is true. Now to suggest there's no expectations of the first overall pick. Like I know he's

young and he's not a big guy and he's the first overall pick. Oh, and if you don't think that he has great expectations from himself, oh, pick back to your first year in the league. Did you expect to produce a lot of offense? I told these guys, Johnny, I played with Brennan Chanahan and Nelson Emerson. They had 44 goals, 30 goals, and I had 14 points.

Those were my linemates. Well, I put with Matt Sundin, he had 90. I had 48. So, like, yeah, that's what happened. But you expect to chip in. And Gavin McKenna expects, and he will chip in. You know, I think by hyperbole about him having no points, it's a little overblown. They're going to be lots of stretches of three games.

I think it's more he hasn't looked dangerous in those three games. Not necessarily the points, but I think we just went through the first line and the third line, right? They're doing well. If those lines were struggling, I bet they changed the second line today. But because they're not, they sort of have two of the most important three lines going, they're going to give it more time. They're going to give him another run at it and then see if they can't work itself out. I think he's in the best spot.

The Leafs are a bit flawed in that second line hole. Unless you want to, you know, put him up with Matthews, take Rostovic down and give him Marchenko. But you can't cater the entire offense to make Gavin McKenna feel good. Like you have to do whatever is best for the team, not just him because he's first overall and you want him to do well. And he's a cornerstone on the franchise. They're trying to win right now. They're not really in a spot to develop and dump him with all the good linemates and all the good ice time. So he's probably in the right spot now.

If it goes like it has gone tonight, it will not. be the same in Vegas on Thursday. They will make changes by Thursday if it doesn't work tonight and if they don't win for sure because guys, we never want to sound the alarm early. But they're going into a road trip that is Vegas Thursday, Colorado Saturday, Utah Tuesday. Like that is, that's the gauntlet. Like that's really tough. If they go out there one and three, come back one, five and one, one and six.

Trouble. It's getting away from here, right? It's getting late early. And that's, you can't have that. No, exactly. I think it's the toughest road trip in the league now. You know, I think that's what it's become. Going Vegas, Colorado, Utah is the toughest roadie.

They're lucky. None of them are back-to-backs, right? They have days off in between. Dude, if Dallas was squeezed in there? That's very tough. And they come home, I think they play Buffalo when they get home. And these are all teams. On Thursday, yes.

Yeah, there were playoff teams a year ago. And the Leas have to prove that they're for real. Like, that's what they have to prove that. And they're going to prove that with their play. And ultimately points in the standings, clearly. But it was one bad year, but it was extremely bad. And it led to massive turnover. So this is not like Kansas City Chiefs.

We're like, well, you know, Mahomes, he got injured. And he still got Mahomes and he got Andy Reed and Spags is still running the defense. This is a completely new operation. So they have Florida. Exactly. Exactly. Florida is like it was a washout, great. We're back, and they deserve that because of how great they were before.

And it's a lot of consistency. Well, you don't think it got Florida's attention that their captains now out for eight weeks. They were like, guys, it basically ruined us last year. Let's not get carried away here. For sure. And they've lost two in overtime. What are they 1-0 and 2 or whatever it is? But the lease have to prove that they're a legit team in the league.

They have to do that. Tonight's a big game. And they've got to find a way win, Paisy? Right? They've got to find a way to win close games. When they were rolling, when they were one of the best teams in the regular season, three, three in the third period, you're like, yeah, yeah, they're going to find a way. Like, they're just someone's going to do something.

They'll go overtime and yeah, they'll lose some, but they're going to win more than they lose. Goalio will make a say, they just have that sense. And right now, because of last year and maybe because of the very short start we've had, you just don't have that same confidence that it's going to happen for sure. Right. It might. You're hopeful, but it doesn't seem like a foregone conclusion right now. Johnny, what do you think of Tony Stolars in the net tonight?

So I walked in the building this morning, morning skate, professional that I am, and I saw Bob out there stretching, and I'm like, and they're like, well, Bob must be playing. And I immediately said I would have played Stolars. I understand. Sergey Vibrovsky, Hall of Famer, incredible, at the down year, I get his age and all those things. They have two good goals. Before they signed Vibrovsky, Stolars got the extension because he was the guy. He was really, really good.

It's not like they have a backup who's not excellent or hasn't been excellent when healthy. I think these first eight games, you just ran through tonight and then the road trip in Buffalo, I think they just rotate every game. Coach said today, they have outlined their goaltending rotation

and Bob doesn't, there's no ego involved saying, give me that, I don't want to just tell me what I'm playing. I think they just go one on, one off. think you win and you stay in. I think it just take advantage of your depth and make sure to rest the guys who both probably need rest at this point in their careers.

Sounds like a tandem, eh? I explained that these two dummies are sitting here nodding and they're like, yeah, great idea. I brought up the same principle at 4 o'clock and they were like, this is crazy. No, I don't agree. This guy, look at him. What was wrong

with the way I laid that out for you? I don't remember you. Johnny said it, so it's cool? No. For starters, I don't know what alternate universe you're talking about here. I said I would start Stolars tonight. I have no problem with that. I'm saying, though, I think over the course of the season, their plan is for Bob to be the number one goaltender.

It doesn't mean 60 starts, but I think there's... $0.34? 49.35? And again, Stolars has proven throughout his career. You can't rely on him to play 40 games. It's not going to happen. It's not going to get better with age for Stolars. going to happen. You can't have a tandem when

one guy can't keep up. Like a tandem is both guys could play and he could play a knife. He can't play 40 out of 55. I think he can play 40 out of 84. It's a very different challenge. Why can't? He's never done it before.

33 starts. He's career right. The rest and the recovery and the preparation in between starts. If every day he's getting four days between starts, that's different than your groin or your knees or your body getting tired. Some of it's weird broken bones and the knees or whatever, but I think

if you, listen, if you're asking me to play 42 games instead of 84, I'm going to be more energized and likely to stay healthy in those 42 games. Like that is a fact. Imagine Johnny, somebody's saying you give me 40 good ones? You'd be like, yeah. I mean, just history says otherwise.

Exactly. It's just history says other ones. And that contract you mentioned is guaranteed whether he starts one game or 84 games. So, you know, I'll- So would you rather have it Bob 38 62 games

60 games 55 like I think it depends on the standings depends how they're playing obviously but you don't want

him on fumes at the end of the year no I'm with you on it if you were going to get to the playoffs so like you have two good goalies you have to use them

I guess I'm more bullish on stolors than you guys I think he's quite good when he's that's not what we're saying we're saying if you play him more

he's like Freddie Anderson but but like he's never had a chance to play longer. Like Fratis didn't ask to play a lot. That's not true. Solars when he had to play a lot.

Last year he had a chance to play a lot and he got hurt. Yeah, and he left the game in Boston and was out forever. But I'm saying, Stolars has not had a chance to totally platoon a whole year. Even last year, Wall was hurt, so we had to play a lot. In Florida, he was the backup. The first year in Toronto did. He didn't play that many games. And he blew his knee out in Jersey, didn't he?

Yeah, but he made dirty free starts, which is his crows. career high. And he was good day. Out of how many games, though. Out of 82. When did he get hurt? No, he got hurt in what game? I don't know. Was it that early? I don't remember. It was in Jersey. Anyways, but

I guess I'm thinking if he gets the breaks between games, he's got a much better chance to stay healthy. Okay. Yeah. Not guaranteed, but better chance. How about Winnipeg leading his Central through three games? What do you think, Carter? Let's go. What do you think

Hallibucks? You think he's watching the games? He's watching them play. Oh, yeah. saying the more we win, we'll just let him rot. They'll dig in and let him rot. Until he's like, I don't know when the breaking point, but until the Winnipeg, the way they're playing right now, they've got to just be saying, we're not, we're waiting until something that can help our team. We're not just moving this guy to say we've got to get rid of them.

They'll dig in, man. They're probably so pissed. They're like, you want to lose 39 grand a day? Go ahead. Johnny? Yeah. I'm sure he's watching, you know, he doesn't want to root for for his ex-teammates, but he's like,

we want them to lose or the goal they to play badly because they want that motivation that always talk about. And I bet the group is pretty galvanized. Like, you know, forget that guy. Forget that guy in him. We just lose, Johnny? We just lose him. I think we may have been playing another clip

and we lost him there because he's over FaceTime. We'll get Johnny back on between the benches. Can I ask you guys? Is there like no sympathy for him, like, among his teammates? Do you think? Like, there's none of that? Oh, there's Johnny. There he is.

Can you hear us, Johnny? know what happened. We lost your mic there. Sorry, buddy. Go ahead. Continue with your thought. Thanks for coming out. Yeah, it's okay. Anyways, I'm just saying Winnipeg would feel great, and I think it's more likely someone around the league pushes the panic button. We're struggling. We need a new goalie. We make a better

offer as opposed to Winnipeg wanting to be rid of this. And I don't think, Jonas, through your question, I'm not sure there's a ton of sympathy for Alibuck. Like, they want, they care about him personally. But like, you know what? He chose to leave. He left a bit of buying.

He has a contract, though. This is different. Edmondson, yeah, like, listen, you've got to do what you got to do. And I get it. And go get it. Go get what you deserve. But you got a contract. You're electing not to show up because you want something else.

I mean, I don't wish poorly, but I'm not like, oh, poor Connor. Well, he's in a tough spot. He's in the spot that he made. And if he didn't like it there, probably should have signed that big extension. Johnny, what do you think about this idea? if you have a no trade clause and you demand to be traded, it allows the team to trade you to anywhere. Like the no trade is gone.

No guy. What do you mean? By the way, don't ever say that. What do you mean by that? Got to be a different language. Yes. You can only ever suggest that. If you also put on the flip side,

anyone has no trade protection, is encouraged to trade it, or they're going to go on waivers, it's going to be claims funny business, they get a $5 million kicker. You can't have it both ways. You can't punish me for exercising something that I negotiated and then let teams do the same thing. So if you want it, and I get the sort of sentiment behind it,

if I have a no trade and I ask you trade it, no trade is null and void, okay. But if Morgan Riley has a no trade and they approach him, say Morgan, maybe we want to move you this summer. What do you think? $5 million in the bank account, sure. Boom. You got to have it both ways.

Yeah. Well, and that will be the counter from the players because teams go to players all the time with no moves and no trades and say, hey, we're looking to move you here. Like that, it does happen. And then they leak it. And then the player looks bad.

And then it's like... Douggy Hamilton. If it gets out, if you get moved, $5 million. If it becomes public, one. And you can stay in the team. Yeah. Yeah.

Listen, it's tricky because... It's tough. It is. It's not good for business that all this kind of stuff. is happening. I think the problem is, part of the problem is too many players have them. Yeah, and it just seems crazy where it's like

I'm only, who's fault is that? I want to get traded, but here's the only three teams. It's like, it should be, I want out of here, well, we're going to get you out of here, but it's not going to be to where you want. Like, something's got to get. And I understand what you mean about both ways. Like, that is very fair, more than fair. Because there's been a lot of organizations that have screwed over

teams or guys. But most guys who ask to get traded do not leave their team. They like, listen, you want to trade me? Morgan Riley. You want to trade me? I'm going to go to these five teams. But if you don't, I'm going to show up and work hard and be a good teammate. Right?

It's something very different if you're sitting out and violating your contract. It's why he's suspended. He's not getting paid. But I, yeah, I mean, a no trade comes at a cost. Like you take less money. You take less something to get a no trade. And if the problem is there's too many of them, that is not the player's problem.

Don't give them out. That's the owner's problem. Don't give it to Brian Hayes. Give it to Jeff O'Neill. Don't give it to me. Give it to the good players. I think I'm the one A, actually. Don't give it to everybody.

I know, Jonas. The problem is it has gotten to a point where it is just a formality in contract negotiations. Like it goes without saying, it's not like they're leaving money on the table. They're not. It's not.

Exactly. What about a limit per team? That's a good idea. But that's dangerous because then it stops you from acquiring players because you can't get that guy because then you would be over that number, you know what I mean? And I don't think that's good for business either. But you could put a, you could wave your no trade and have it not exist.

So then you're not a player with a no trade to come to a team that has the six match you could have. There's ways around it, oh, that's not a terrible idea, a limit per team, because then it would be just for the best players. And if you're player seven on a six player team, I know who I am. It's like it stinks. But you know who you are. And if you want to get that no trade, play better. Be a better player or go to a worse team and be a better player there. I don't love this idea of waving it if you want to get traded.

Yeah, there isn't enough good players in the league, and where do you draw the artificial line? How does it? Five a team? Is it ten a team? But ten a team? I mean, that's what we have right now. Right. So is it five a team? You're telling me there's five guys on Calgary that deserve a no trade clause right now.

No, but they wouldn't get, you don't have to send them out. They have zero. Yeah. But they get zero. The best player is going to say when I'm up, guess what? You don't have them? I'm taking it. Like that's what any good agent.

You can say no. But they don't say no. Right. Because especially in certain markets, you've got to give it to them. Like if you want to keep the guy and that's what happened. That's the reality of sports and life for that matter. But there are certain markets that simply can't offer what other markets can. So in order to try to keep a guy or get a guy, they're going to give the perks.

And that's how we got in the position we got it. And then the best team's like, well, I guess we got to do it too because if they're going to do it there. And it's just spiraled completely out of control. just don't see how you get the cap back in the bag. I just don't see. And yeah, I don't have an answer for you because I would argue it would be greater for the game if you got rid of the hard cap. That's never going to get rid of. That's never going anywhere.

They're never going to, but that would alleviate a lot of pressure for a lot of teams. You get out from underneath certain contracts and move. Waste in your breath. Total waste. I understand that. But the Players Association isn't going to give up these perks. Like, they fought for them. They got them.

I don't know how you get around it. I really don't. I think it's just completely out of control. And I guess you've got to blame the owners and you've got to blame Batman for that. His league, he allowed it to get to this point. He didn't put a stop. I think Nashville was one of the last teams to not give any.

Nashville playing tonight. I think David Poyle was, like, I'm not giving anyone to anyone. That's right. That's it. I don't do it. That's right. Pecarrene, sorry. But I think it was Pecarede, who might have been the first guy,

who finally got one. And then Romaniosi got one. and then Ryan O'Reilly got a verbal one. And then Steve Stanley, it's that slippery slope. They tried to fight the good fight. You're asking for, Hayes. But once you sort of got out of the bag, how do you say no?

It's over. And that's the point. Once he gives it to one guy. I would love to see six per team, and I would just, like, I would be curious to go down the league's roster. Like, okay, how many guys, like, I think Dakota Joshua, respectfully, has a 12-no-trade. Outrageous.

Yeah, outrageous, clearly. Right. But, you know, but if you looked at six, how many guys would be really bet out of shape? Well, here's the problem. Not many. Here's the problem that you have.

Is if you have, eventually, too many guys in the league, like it's going to be a grandfathering issue. Yeah. Because when Celebrini's up, you have to grandfathered in. No, but my point is, let's say San Jose has six.

You think Celebrini, they're going to trade Celebrini because they have six? No. He's going to get it. You say to the next guy, we don't have any more to give out? So Celebrini doesn't get one if you have six.

Well, so you got to get rid of a player. They don't have six. No, but, This is all hypothetical anyway. Maybe it's not a legitimate rule. Hazy. Yeah.

Aizzi. Six starting on contracts signed in 2031 new CBA. Yeah. So you can get the 14, I guess, if you have eight. But eventually when the eight run out, then you have the six that you sign from that day forward. You can't sign more than six from that day forward. I'm just saying it's going to penalize my good team. Yes, it's, yes.

A hundred. Well, yeah, sure. It is. But if you like the team, and then you might get the wink, wink, wink, nudge, deals. I'm not putting in writing, but hey, I promise I will trade you. That gets thick. Trust me. Yeah, that gets sticky. Which gets a little greasy. Very greasy.

And listen, Gary Batman didn't bring this up because he just was, you know, pontificating. He's laying the groundwork to have the conversation. Sure. Yeah, because it's against the players. You know, it's a player's issue that he doesn't like. So, of course, he's going to take issue with it and go

public with it. I understand that. But I don't know. I just don't think there's a perfect way around it. You either you either get rid of all of them, which is the actual best case scenario. But the players aren't going to accept that. And I understand why they wouldn't. That would be the best for fans. But that's the best.

Yeah, you just get rid of it. And everyone's tradable. And but then what you're going to- What if we go? Go ahead. Hey, Z. Hang on. Doesn't baseball have some sort of like five and ten rule? Yeah.

Like 10 years on five on a team and 10 in the league, then you're eligible? Yes. Like if it was a, if it was a milestone based on tenure. It's a great. way of putting it's a great formula until 10 and 5 and you have to be 5 years with the same team which doesn't happen that often like maybe there's

something in that conversation as opposed to oh you're right is it mandatory once you yes so it's 10 and 5 you got to be in the league for 10 years and 5 years with your own team and then it's a full no trade no move you you control your destiny everyone gets it everybody

who has that status it's like 600 games in your own room back of the day oh we get your own room on the road yeah so For the Leafs, it would be Matthews, Tavarous, Nielander, Riley. Like, those would be, there'd be four guys within no trade laws. Whatever. You can make it 8 and 4, you can make it 10 and 5. Like, that might not be the worst thing in the world.

Yeah, I like that idea, actually. I think baseball's got it. That is. Would it be a full-in-moving clause? Yeah, it would be, effectively. Yeah. And then if you're a guy who size, like, you know, in your seventh year, you sign a long extension, on the third year of your extension, now you hit the 10-year mark, and then there's your no move.

Mm-hmm. I like that. It's not the worst we've come up with on this show. No, it's pretty good. We're just stealing it from baseball, but we'll take credit. Dude, we've had some doozies on this show. You're not staying much there, man. That's very true.

It's a low bar. Yeah, it is. All right, Johnny. We'll catch you at the game tonight. Have fun. All right, fellas. Mike Johnson joining us here on the Maple Toyota Hotline. The newest tracks.

Let's go. Music. And the next big thing. Always on the new music first. Your first place. Stay here at all. Because you don't like it, love, I want to play it twice.

Playing now. IHeart New Music. Your digital station for brand new drops, fresh vines, and tomorrow's bangers. I think we need something new. Discover IHeart new music. Always fresh, always first. Stream now on the free IHartRadio app.