The Athletic Hockey Show - Are the Carolina Hurricanes the Stanley Cup favorite?

Episode Date: May 11, 2026

The Carolina Hurricanes are the first team to advance to the third round of the Stanley Cup playoffs, dispatching the Philadelphia Flyers in four games and becoming just the fifth team in NHL history to start a postseason with eight straight wins. Today, the guys discuss if the Canes have become the favorite to win the Stanley Cup, Mitch Marner leading the league in playoff scoring, and if Gavin McKenna’s similarities to Marner should be viewed positively or negatively in Toronto for the Maple Leafs. Plus, thoughts on the Montreal Canadiens as legitimate contenders, now up 2-1 over the Buffalo Sabres, and the Anaheim Ducks tying their series with the Vegas Golden Knights after a 4-3 win last night. Hosts: Max Bultman and Mark LazerusExecutive Producer: Chris FlanneryProducer: Chris FlanneryWatch full episodes on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theathletichockeyshowJoin our Discord Server: https://discord.gg/VTm9VjkFSubscribe to The Athletic: https://theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the athletic hockey show. Hey, everybody, Max Boltman here alongside Mark Lazarus for another episode of the Athletic Hockey Show. Las, it's been a while since we did one of these, just the two of us here, but we should have a good show here because we've got a lot to talk about here. First of all, we have a team advancing to the third round of the playoffs, sorry, to the conference finals, the Carolina Hurricanes, their second consecutive sweep to begin these playoffs. First time it's ever happened in this current playoff format where the first two rounds are best to seven.

that a team sweeps through it. First time a team has started 8 and 0 in 40 years. It has been very impressive so far from the Carolina Hurricanes. It has. Are you a rest or a rust guy? Like I remember back in 2015, the Blackhawks had nine days off after sweeping Minnesota in the second round. They had nine days off until the conference final against Anaheim.

And we spent nine days discussing the Rust versus Wrestling. Do you think it's a good thing to get all this time off to rest up to heal up? Or do you think that they lose their flow here with a week and a half to kill before they find out where they're playing next? I think it's different at different points of the series. I think it's Rust at the start. I think if the other team goes like six games or even seven games and they're, you know, dialed into their rhythm, I think that you favor the team that is in their rhythm to start

the series. But as the series wears on, then I think you start to see the rest gap and the recovery gap as you get to game five, six, at seven. I think the thing that's incumbent upon the team that is rested is to not let yourself get put out of the series early because then the rest really catches up and works in your favor as it goes on. We'll see what that looks like here, right? I mean, Montreal and Buffalo is a 2-1 series. We're definitely going to talk a lot about that one later on. And I think in either one of them, those teams are going to have a chance to give Carolina a really good

series. But for right now, Laz, as of today, the Carolina Hurricanes are currently the betting favorite for the Stanley Cup. In a world of the Colorado Avalanche still exists, I was surprised to see that. But what do you think? Is that a, is that a proper reaction to the dominance we've seen from Carolina this far? I think it's just that they're already in the conference final in Colorado isn't, right? I think that's just like, when you look at like Dom change his percentage chances of winning the Stanley Cup after every game, when you win around, you get a huge jump because you've already made it. There's still a chance Colorado doesn't make it to the Western Conference final. So I think that has much to do with it as anything. I do think that the Eastern path is easier.

Montreal and Buffalo are great teams. They're not Colorado. They're not Minnesota. They might not even be Vegas or Anaheim. So certainly Colorado's got a steeper hill to climb. But yeah, I mean, the Hurricanes are eight wins from the Stanley Cup. Nobody else is. They should be the favorite. And the way that they've done it here, I think, is the subject of a lot of the discussion here, too. And that I think is what I want to spend a little time on right now. They've beaten the Ottawa Senators and the Philadelphia Flyers. To me, the Ottawa Senators are one of the most underrated teams in the NHL this season. Because the goaltending was so bad for most of the year, it was not that bad in the playoffs. And I give Carolina full marks for sweeping that version of the Senators.

No, they didn't score. They didn't score partly because Carolina is a smothering defensive outfit. Flyers, maybe it's a little bit of a different story. I think the Metro, you know, that Penguin's Flyers series, I think Philly was quite impressive in it. But they were impressive by basically doing a version of what Carolina is trying to do it, and they just can't do it at the level Carolina does. Yeah, look, I feel like we have this debate all the time. Is Carolina good for the league or bad for the league? Their style of play, some people find it disgusting and ugly and horrible to watch.

I have always found it kind of impressive. They're so fast. They're so aggressive. of the way they forecheck. They play textbook hockey. Like, this is the way hockey is supposed to look. Now, a lot of it is volume. They're not the prettiest team.

They're not Montreal. We're not seeing the skill. We're not seeing Lane Hudson-type moves. We're not seeing Nikita Kutrov type moves. Connor McDavid type moves. They are straightforward. They do the same thing. Every single game, no matter what you throw at them,

they always look the same. It's admirable. It works. They're the most successful, I think, regular season team that we've had in the past decade or so. They're consistently in it. This will do their fourth trip to the conference final since 2019,

but this is where it tends to stop working because those first two rounds, they're playing inferior opponents because they're so good in the regular season, they get the favorable draw, they earn that favorable draw. People that are complaining about the fact that they had Otto and Philly,

well, that's why you win the top seat. Tampa could have had that. Buffalo could have had that. They didn't. But at the conference final where you start facing a really good team, Montreal or Buffalo is a huge step up from Philadelphia. This is where we've seen them run

into the wall because they refuse to change. So I don't know if what they do can win the Stanley Cup, but it is the most dominant style of hockey out there right now for 82 regular season games and then two rounds of the playoffs. They still have to show me more in the conference final. You said they refuse to change. Do you think that's true this year? I think that's been true in some past years,

but I look at them this year and I think they are the most talented version of the Carolina Hurricanes you've ever seen. I think that second line with Blake, Stankevin, and Hall gives them like a legit second option. How about this Taylor Hall Renaissance? This playhouse has been first option. Holy cow. And Logan Stankevin's leading the playoffs in goals. He's been amazing.

And the one place that is kind of the same is in goal. And I still question whether they have the kind of typical Stanley Cup winning goalie. But I'm also looking around the league, as I'm not seeing any typical Stanley Cup winning goalies in too many of these creases left around the league. And may not be any, really. I mean, even in Minnesota where you have that first round pick in Esper Walsstead, he's a rookie, right? Like these are not Andre Vasselovsky and Conner. Hellebuk that we're talking about here. No, you've got a, you know, Jakob Dobesh and Lucas Dostal and Jesper Walsbett,

these are you really young guys. And then you've got Scott Wedgwood and McKenzie Blackwood, these career journeymen. There's, and Buffalo with, you know, Alex Lyon and Oucapeka Lukanen. These are not dominant names. This is going to be a year where an Antineemi type wins the Stanley Cup, right? We see this happen more and more now where you win, you know, not despite your goalie, but certainly not because of your goalie the way you used to. But Freddie Anderson, Freddie Anderson is not a 950 goalie.

He's been a 950 goalie through these first two series, and we have seen this time and time again with him where once he gets to that late in the second round or into that third round, he turns into a pumpkin. And it's been that way since 2015. He has a long track record of being really good early and then falling apart against the really good teams. I don't know if that'll happen again.

I'm not sitting here saying that he's a bad goalie, but history suggests he cannot keep this up. Very few goalies can keep up at 950. But if he's playing a team like Montreal with all that skill, all that offense, that power play, do we really think he's the guy? I don't know. He's got to prove it.

That's the thing about this Carolina team, as good as they've been, as dominant as they've been, as admirable as they are. They haven't proven anything. And until they do it and they reach a Stanley Cup final, you know, they're not even on Edmonton's level because at least Edmonton got there twice. I think that's a fair point. I mean, I think that in Carolina, you talk about the 950 with Anderson. I think Carolina's defensive structure is capable of making most goalie.

maybe not a 950, but a 910 to a 915, which is absolutely good enough in my mind to win a Stanley Cup. They also have Brandon Bussie, and if Anderson does falter or turn into a pumpkin, as you say, they can go to another body in there and see if he can get hot. Like that's a formula that we have seen in the past as well. Vegas, how many goalies did Vegas use en route to their Stanley Cup a few years ago? We may be seeing, I got a buddy, Prashant Eyre, who's a really staunch believer that you do not invest heavily in the goaltending position because it's easy enough to find goalies who are. capable, who can give you good minutes for at least stretches that you shouldn't ever invest your

first round picks or a $12 million contract, a $10 million contract, and a goalie. We'll see. I mean, this year is certainly a really good case and point for what Prashant has been kind of preaching on that topic. And Carolina has another guy who they could throw in and do it. I think to me, it just all comes down to the skaters in front of them. And if the skaters in front of Anderson or Bussi or whatever, however it shakes out, are playing the way that they have and are able to continue to do it against a Montreal or a Buffalo,

then obviously it's possible. But I think they're going to be much more tested by Montreal and Buffalo than they have been thus far. Well, that's the whole point of Rod Brindamor's system, right, is to alleviate pressure on the goalie. Basically, you possess the puck all the time and you don't have to defend when you're on offense. You forecheck, you cycle, you keep the puck in the offensive zone. And when you are in the defensive zone, you keep guys to the outside and you get the hell out of there in a hurry. And they're really good at it. Really good at it.

Here's the most encouraging thing to me, if I'm a Carolina fan right now, is Seth Jarrett. has four points. Nick Eilers has four points. Sebastian Ajo has four points. Andre Sveshtnikov, I think has two points. He's got one goal. Like, that could be a concern. I look at that is like, that's no way that keeps up. Those players are way too talented, way too good and proven in the playoffs. Like that regression to the mean is coming. And maybe that second line, you know, maybe Logan Stankov can't do this forever. Maybe Taylor Hall is not a 1.3 points per guy point per game guy anymore. And if that comes down, those other guys are going to come back up, and I think the offense is still going to be there. And, you know, maybe they don't

win every game two to one. Maybe they start winning them four to three. But their offensive guys have done nothing yet. And they're the first team to sweep the first two rounds since 1985. That's encouraging, if you ask me. Yeah, it's very similar to the way I feel about Montreal. And we can kind of get into that series now here. But like, I would have expected that Nick Suzuki they're scoring a lot more goals than they have thus far. But it hasn't mattered because Alex Newhook is. Kirby Doc is. Kirby Doc is. Right. All these guys have stepped up in a way that makes and say, hey, we can survive a bad, we're all going on a month now, a quiet month from the stars for both Carolina and Montreal. And it just hasn't mattered.

I mean, Montreal had a very long, grueling first round series. So I guess in that way, it kind of mattered. But in the same way, they came out on top, and they're playing very good hockey now against Buffalo again. How scary is that top? I was watching that game last time. Terrifying. And it kind of dawned on me, you got Slavkovsky, Cawfield, Suzuki, Demadov, and Lane Hudson on PP1. I don't, that's as good as what we saw from Emmett in the last few years.

Like that is absolutely terrifying. Not only are they all really good, but they're all so skilled. Like, Stavkovsky's that big guy, but he's also got these incredible hands. And we saw what Lane Hudson can do with open ice. We know what Cole Cawfield could do from almost anywhere on the ice. Suzuki's like the fifth best player on that, that PP1. And he's like an all-world Selky caliber player. Like, that is absolutely terrifying power play unit.

And it is. I mean, the first. fact that they're able to, I mean, when that goes to, it's 3-1 and they go to the power play there, you're kind of thinking like, okay, this is the game right here. Because if Montreal gets it to 4-1, it's going to be an uphill battle. And with that unit that they're able to trot out, I know what the odds say that the scoring on a power play is, even a great power play, is trying to be 30%. It just feels like more than that when those guys step on the ice. I don't know what it is about them or if it's just, you know, a little bit of a recency bias for

how good that they've been, but that's how it felt. And we've seen talent doesn't always equal good power plays, right? We've seen with Colorado this year, where you could have all the talent in the world, and if they don't work well together, if the structure's off, then it's a problem. But we see what Montreal can do. They're playing well. They are aggressive. And Buffalo, God, stop taking so many damn penalties. Like, there's a fine line between aggressive and reckless, and they were on the wrong side of it again last night, and you can't keep giving that team power play opportunities because you're just not going to win. Buffalo's power play is just dead in the water right now. And if you lose that special teams battle that drastically, you have

no chance of winning a hockey game. Yeah, coaches will talk about you don't always have to score on the power play, but you always have to create or maintain momentum on your power play. That's not really happening for Buffalo right now. My biggest issue with Buffalo right now, though, Las is it just feels sloppy. It doesn't feel, I mean, and this was a risk. I mean, we thought this was a risk for the Buffalo Sabres and they got in the playoffs. We talked about it coming into this round, right, that Montreal had to check against Tampa,

a team that makes you pay. I don't know that Boston is a team that makes you pay. It's not, you know, different kind of game. Boston doesn't want to trade chances with you anyway. But when Buffalo got into this game, like, were they going to be able to be disciplined enough against the Montreal team that can absolutely take advantage on quick, very little opportunities?

Well, yeah, I mean, the Bruins are basically neutral zone trapping. Like, it's completely different. You know, the habs are out here, boat racing them. And they're so skilled and so fast that they're able to do that. And then you see a guy like, you know, like Logan Stanley just having just these awful night. He's turning the puck over. He's lost in his defensive end. You can't do that.

You can't afford that against a team like Montreal that's so good in transition. You can get away with that against a Boston that doesn't really have the depth to do that, to punish you for those mistakes. Montreal will punish you for those mistakes. There's so much skill, so much talent, young, excited, you know, go-getter talent out there, that every mistake is magnified in Buffalo, Logan Stanley in particular, is making a absolute ton of mistakes. And I don't know what you do about it. I mean, we always talk about do you switch the goalie because you can't do anything else here.

Do you bring in Ucapeka-Lukin? And I don't think anyone's laying that game three at Alex Lyons' feet. But it wasn't Esper Wollstead's fault either. And they brought in Philip Gustafin, John Hines did. That didn't work out well. And he went right back to Walsett. I don't know what you do here. If you feel like you need to make a change for the sake of making change,

then it feels like you're coaching against yourself. Yeah. They had two players that played less than seven minutes in this game, two forwards. I thought that was interesting. Sam Carrick and Jason Zucker. Jason Zucker, who's a good offensive producer for them, usually. And that line is so important to them with McLeod, especially on this exact subject that we're talking about to me,

that is the line that gives the rest of their lineup, kind of its shape, it's structure. It's kind of the conscience line for the Buffalo Sabers to have Zucker. And I assume that that's 647 that he played last night is not a product of they don't believe in him. I assume that there must be something going on with Jason Zucker. Well, I mean, I mean, Lindy Ruff said he's physically fine.

He chucked it up to the fact that there were so many special teams out there and he's not on the power play anymore. And then he was sitting for too long and you don't want to get a guy who's cold out there. There's always a reason you can always rationalize it away. But I think he needs to make more of an effort to get him out there. he can be a difference maker. It's the depth scores. We talk about it all the time on this show. It's your third and fourth line that really makes the difference in these long playoff series, not just the top six. There's a lot of series left here, but at the same time,

that could change in a hurry in game four. If game four goes Montreal's way, this is going to start to feel like an inevitability. What does Buffalo have to do to prevent that feeling from setting in? It's tough because this is a young team without a lot of experience, right? It's easy to start spiraling and start doubting yourself. I've been fascinated with the idea of momentum in a playoff series for the 14 seasons I've been covering the NHL. And I ask guys about it every year. And you always hear different things. Most guys will tell you there is no momentum from game to game, that these guys are

professional athletes with professional mindsets and they can move on quickly from a game. But it's got to be creeping in Buffalo's head. Like, we can't skate with these guys right now the way we're playing. Our stars aren't stepping up and our defense is getting overwhelmed by these guys. And our goal is not bailing us out. They're only human. You have to start letting that thought creep in your head. And, you know, Buffalo is a good team.

team. In Montreal, like, I feel like this seems to be the series where we're all changing our mind on Montreal, where from their, they're a good young team that's on its way to they've arrived. It feels like in the last two games, we're all looking at this team going, wow, this is like a real team now. This is a real contender. And I'm wondering if the Buffalo Sabres in the back of their minds are starting to think the same thing. Well, that happened for me in the Tampa series. I mean, that to me is when I started to change my mind because I was similar. I was feeling like, okay, this is a team that is really exciting, has a really bright future. But, you know, are they a team that's ready to do it on the highest level? Now, there's still some key,

some key players are very young for them, a little green. Even though they did, a lot of their key young players did have the bubble push, you know, Suzuki, Cofield, those guys to have a taste of what this is like to go on a deep run. But the Hudson's the Slavkovsky's like, sometimes you have to get your scars before you can really be ready for it. Well, Slavkowski's been in two Olympics and he's been a major, he's been the number one guy in two Olympics. I think that really does. He is unflappable much more than a guy his age normally would be. I totally agree. And that's the thing that I underrated is that, like, that fully translated for him. And it has continued to. Lane Hudson is absolutely ready for this. I mean, Lane Hudson has earned, he's gotten a ton of respect already through his early NHL career. But I think doing what he's done in the playoffs so far really takes him into that kind of next stratosphere. For me, and I think probably for the broader public, too. So I'm absolutely there. I think Montreal is here. They've arrived and they're capable of, I think they're capable of beating Carolina. I'm not necessarily going to pick that. But I think they are capable of doing it if they can advance past. Buffalo first. It really feels like we're in a golden age of exciting defensemen, aren't we?

Like, there are so many Bobby Orr types out there now. You got your McCar, you've got your Hughes, you've got your Hudson, you've got your Schaefer, you got your Werenski. There's so many guys right now, Ross and Ms. Dahlene even, guys that are just, there's so much talent now in the back end that it really makes you rethink how you build a team. Everyone always knows you need a number one defenseman, right? But I think when you think of a number one defenseman, you think of like, I don't know, like a Duncan Keith type, not these like supremely gifted offensive guys now. And now all this offense is coming from the back end with these just

guys that have the puck on their stick all the time. And when you see what Lane Hudson can do on a power play, what he can do with open ice, it completely fundamentally changes the way hockey is played. It really feels like we're entering this golden age where you can have a guy like Lane Hudson almost flying under the radar when he's one of the most gifted and talented

defensemen we've ever seen. It's incredible out there right now. Well, put a pin in that because I think we're going to have a little talk about the Norris Trophy finalists later on in the show. But let's take a quick break right there. We're going to come back. We're going to talk about the West next and in Colorado, Minnesota, shaping up to be every bit the fight that we hope it would be. Very back.

All right. We are back, Lasz. And let's get into the Western Conference here. We'll talk about Colorado, Minnesota in a second. But let's start with the game that happens Sunday night, Vegas, Anaheim. And just as Vegas is starting to look like they were finding their seasoning, finding their experience in the playoffs, Anaheim comes and punches back. And I think a big reason why is that Anaheim was able to face a Vegas team that was short

one mark stone. Yeah, I mean, I'm not sure there's any, I mean, we could talk about your McDavid's and your McKinnons, but I'm not sure there's a player as important to his team as Mark Stone is to Vegas. He's just, he's the heartbeat of that team, but he's also the best player they've got. You know, Jack Eichael include it. When Mark Stone's healthy, I feel like he's one of the best all-around players in the league. And what he does it in all three zones, really, for Vegas, it's just irreplaceable. The whole lineup kind of falls apart a little bit when you take him out.

And if he's out long-term here, all of a sudden I think Anaheim starting look like the favorite here. Favorite might be slightly strong for me, but they're absolutely capable. I mean, they've already guaranteed it will be a long series as we sit here at 2-2. Again, we just talked about it with Montreal. The youth of Anaheim is not shying away from this moment. I think you expect your Alex Clornes, your Mikel Granlins, your Chris Kreider, your Jacob Trubas to step up in these games. Beckett Seneca has been really good.

Leo Carlson has been really good. Jackson Lecombe has been fantastic. He's not even too young anymore. He's in his prime. But nonetheless, like Anaheim's not shying away from the moment. And this is another team. Their second power play unit has Cutter Gauthier and Jackson Lecommon. That's right.

This is another team that if you take any penalties, you're screwed. Like they're just not going to fail. You're not going to be able to shut them down every time. You have to play so cleanly against them. And that's not what really Vegas does. Vegas is kind of a grind-it-out, getting your face kind of team that is prone to taking more penalties as a result. And they can't afford to do that against this Anaheim team again, especially with Mark

Stone out, one of their top BK guys. I think I would be ready to call Anaheim the favorite if we were getting kind of, and it feels strange to say this because he's still a pretty young guy, but classic Lucas Dostal, the Lucas Dostal I have in my head, hasn't really been the guy they've had in net for these playoffs. I thought he was better last night, but he still, you know, the end numbers aren't amazing. That to me is like the big question. If Dostal, we talked about this with the scores for Carolina, the top scores, if Lucas

Dostal clicks into his A game, this Anaheim team immediately becomes a threat to anyone. Yeah, I mean, both these teams are a little dicey in goal right. now. Do you trust Carter Hart? I mean, he kind of came crashing back to Earth after three really good games. For sure. And the same thing with Dostal. I mean, I don't feel good about any of these guys right now. Dostal, for all of the tire pumping that Jesse does on him, has not been all that great this year. He's had a mediocre year at best and hasn't taken that huge next step. This is an opportunity for him to take that huge next step if you do it in the playoffs. He hasn't quite gotten there yet. This one, you know, this is, we're tied to, too, and I think I brought this up in a previous

show. But I'm curious about the coaching matchup here. John Tortorella, has not had a ton of playoff success in a very long time. And Joel Quentville is, he's the king of this. He has, his Blackhawks teams went 18 and 1 in series that were tied two to two. His only loss was to Anaheim of all teams in 2015, and the Hawks went on to win that in game seven. They've won, he won all nine series that started out two and two. He is the master for all, we can talk about him until we're blue in the face about all the other stuff,

but he is a master at in-series tweaks. This is what he does. This is what separates him from other coaches, is his ability to evaluate an opponent and then make the necessary adjustments to beat them. He does not lose series that start 2-2 because he outplays them in 5, 6, and 7. Now, Vegas, as a team, I saw this in Jesse's story today.

They're 10 and 4 in games 5 through 7 in the last three years. So they're very good at closing out series too. So I'm really curious to see if John Tortorella can keep up with Joel Quenville in the matchup game because home or road, Quenville always seems to win that battle. That's a ridiculous stat. 18 and 1. 18 and 1.

I don't even know how to process that. I mean, that feels like, Joel Quentville should have about five more Stanley Cups, given that, it feels like. I mean, they won three Stanley Cups in that time. I know, but 18 and one. I mean, I guess that's, yeah. It's an absolutely incredible stat.

And it's not a fluke. It's, you know, it's Pete DeBore going 9 and 0 in game 7. There's, when you get to a certain point, it's not luck anymore. It's not a fluke. There's a reason that it happens. And, you know, it's been a while since Joel Quenville's been in this situation. but if history is any indication,

the ducks have the upper hand in these last three games. Best of three goes to Joel Quendville. And obviously Stone's presence or lack thereof, looms over all of that. I will say, like, if Stone has been the best defensive winger in the National Hockey League for the last five, ten years, not too far behind him has been Mitch Marner.

And Mitch Marner has looked, much to, I'm sure, the chagrin of Toronto Maple Leafs fans, every bit like a playoff difference maker in this series. Mitch Marner was number one of my Selkeye ballot this year. More winger should get Selkelyove. He's a fabulous hockey player. Like this whole narrative on him has been so dumb for so long. He had what?

He had 13 points in 13 games last year for the Maple Leafs. He had 14 points in 11 in 2023, 6 and 7 in 2022. It's never been his fault. This has always been overblown. He's a playmaker. He doesn't score goals. He sets them up. And if the guys around him are not finishing, this is what happens.

I mean, yeah, he can score goals, but he's like a 25, 30 goal guy. He's not a 45-50 goal guy. He needs people to finish the plays that he makes. Mitch Marner is an outstanding hockey player, one of the best two-way players in league, if not the best two-way player league. He kills penalties. Nick Suzuki, who's going to win the Salky, really doesn't.

This whole narrative has always, it's been very Toronto, right? This is just a very Toronto thing. Oh, he's only got a point per game in the playoffs. That's not good enough. It's his fault. Hang on. Hang on. Come on.

I will, I agree with you that Mitch Marner is a fabulous hockey player who should not have been run out of Toronto. The one thing I'll say, as it pertains to that narrative, go isolate for games five through seven. That is not a myth, right? Like those points were not coming in the make or break elimination games. And I'm not saying that that's a small sample size, right? All of a sudden we're talking about like 12 to 15 games there over that span,

and that's hard to judge. But I don't think it was a complete fabrication or completely flying in the face of numbers what was happening late in the series. But he was the only one that got it, right? Like all the other guys were also flaming out at the same time. And if it's a team issue, singling out one guy, 100%. Just because of the money he makes, like, I don't buy that at all. Austin Matthews wasn't tearing it up in those games either.

I totally agree. Again, I'm not saying that Ms. Marner should have been scapegoated in the way that he was. I'm just saying, like, in terms of the narrative, like, there was some statistical backing to, and really, it was about the Toronto Maple Leafs. It should never have become about Mitch Marner. But obviously, like, we all watched those games. None of the Toronto Maple Leafs, including their stars. Ironically, William Nealander might have been the only one that I think was

stepping up in those. But yeah, you're right. It should never have become about Mitch Marner. And right now it is about Mitch Marner in a very positive way. I mean, he has the hat trick in game three. I thought he was still fantastic in game four last night. He will obviously need to be a guy that'll lean on even more and more if Marks don't continues to miss time. Absolutely. And this is another, this is kind of like Carolina where they've gotten this far. And Jack Eichel only has one goal. He's got a ton of assists. He's only got one goal. Tomosh Hurdle finally broke what a 30-game drought last night. He finally got a goal. So there's a lot of room to grow here, even with Stone's injury.

There are guys that can step up and make up the difference. But it's just, it's a big, this was also in Jesse's story over the last however many years that Stone's been in Vegas. The Golden Knights have a 651 points percentage with him and a 585 without him. I'm not sure there's too many guys that have that significant an impact on wins and losses as Mark Stone does in Vegas. And for good reason, he's a true star. Let's go to the other Pacific series here. And for as good as Vegas and Anaheim has been, I think it's been probably the best series of the second round.

The one we were all the most excited for was Colorado, Minnesota. I don't know that any game of Colorado, Minnesota has necessarily lived up to that, but I think the counterpunch that you saw from the Wild in game three was still kind of indicative of what we wanted to see from two of the league's heavyweights. Yeah, I mean, you can say that about this whole playout. This whole round has stunk, right? Because every game's been a blowout for the most part. But the series, like, they might be good.

They might wind up being good series, but the individual games have been kind of dreadful to watch. That's been the case here. I mean, that was just a massive win for Minnesota, obviously, just to get their confidence back, because they had just been run out of the building in Denver, those two games. And just to be reminded that, oh, yeah, we have stars too. We're really deep to.

We're really fast to. And we can hang with these guys, which they can. You know, I have more concerns almost for Colorado than I do for Minnesota at this point. I'm concerned about the goaltending. I don't know what you do. Scott Wedgwood has been so good down the stretch, but he's Scott Wedgwood. He's, and I wonder, we always talk about rookies hitting the wall. Can a 33-year-old hit the wall?

This is the guy who's never had more than 32 starts in the season. And now all of a sudden he's at 45 and usually he was like, you know, five or 10 starts a season. This was not a major player. Now he's got 45 regular season starts and seven playoff starts. Do you sit him just to rest him even though you just had three days off? It's a tough spot to be in because he does not have the track record. He has been playing way over his head all season behind a great team. and McKenzie Blackwood also isn't like a star goalie.

So I don't know what you do right now if you're Jared Bedner. The good news is they have the series lead for them. So really anything they do, they have time to adapt to, right? If you go with Wedgwood again and he struggles again, you can go to Blackwood after that in a 2-2 series and feel like, all right, now it's best two out of three here. If you go to Blackwood and he falters, well, you can go right back to Wedgwood and say,

okay, you got the rest. Now let's get it right. So I don't think they're in too much trouble in that regard. I still look at the Minnesota Wilde who have been playing without Joel Eric Sinek and say, man, how different would this series have been? Maybe it doesn't completely change it. But I don't think that the first two games would have felt as lopsided with one of the best defensive centers in the National Hockey League and the lineup. But, you know, that's what it is.

It's injuries. We just talked about it with Mark Stone and Vegas. You're going to have to play without star players, crucial players. I do think if the Minnesota Wild can get this to level, Colorado starts to get a little bit sweaty here. It really does. It feels like a must win for Minnesota. Minnesota again. Obviously, game three was a must win, but it still does, because if you're down three to one, is anybody going to be able to beat these avalanche? Three straight. Like, it feels

like the wild have to hold serve at home. I'll be going out to Denver for game five, and I'm excited for that, but I'm, you know, if it's a three one series versus a two two series, huge difference in the whole mentality and the vibe and the comfort levels of both teams. It just seems like winning three in a row against this Colorado team is an unreasonable ask. So, you know, it's very strange to have a must win after a must win, but this still feels like a must win for Minnesota. Who's impressed you the most in this series so far from either team? Impressed me the most. God.

You know, it's been good to see Carilla Caprizov snap out of it because he was not good in that Dallas series, see him taking over again. But this whole playoffs, it's been Brock Faber for me. Yeah. Like, I always thought Brock Faber was a pretty good defenseman. I remember the whole, like I was in the, me and Russo were having fun playing off the fans with

whole Calder Trophy debate between Connor Bedard and Brock Faber and the plus minus and all that. But Faber has evolved into this. He's pretty, again, it just goes back to our talk about, you know, this Golden Age of Defenseman. In another era, the way Brock Faber plays, he would be the guy. He would be the Quinn Hughes,

the Kail McCarr, the Rasmus Dahlene, the Lane Hudson. He's got that kind of skill. He just doesn't have to show it as often because he's playing on the same team as Quinn Hughes now, but he is a spectacular player who is much more offensively gifted than I think I gave him credit for now having watched him up close and, uh, and every day for two rounds here, I think he is as

good. He's in the conversation for that second tier of great defensemen that we're talking about. I think it was the TNT broadcast had an interview with McCar on the bench after game one. And they were asking about, you know, going head to head with Hughes and two of the best defensemen in the world. And McCar like stopped him. It was like, I think Faber's in that same conversation too. Like, don't, don't leave him out of this. And so he certainly has the respect of his high end peers. I agree with you. Faber is my answer to that question as well. you know, part of where I was going with that is I think this series has been dictated by just these waves of push from the teams, right? I think we talked about it after game one.

It was 14 different goal scores. It maybe hasn't been the same as some of these other series where there's a guy or two really stepping up. But to the extent there is, I fully agree, it's Brock Faber has been the guy. And, you know, Quinn Hughes is always amazing. Carole Caprizzav is always amazing. We take that for granted. Yeah, yeah. Exactly.

But Faber, I do think, has probably raised his profile a healthy amount so far. and, you know, again, should be a really, really good game for tonight. Does Colorado have a Brock Nelson problem? This happened last year, too, where in that series against Dallas, he wasn't good. He was not making an impact. He was so good in the regular season this year, deserves to be a Selke finalist, had a lot of offense, too. He's just been invisible.

I think he's got a goal and an assist in seven games so far in these playoffs, just non-existent. Is that what you need from Brock Faber, though? Are you measuring Brock? Sorry, not Brock Faber. Is that what you measure him on? He's your second line center. I mean, this has been, Colorado, we've been talking for so many years about it. They've been trying to replace NASCodry at second line center, and then they got Nelson.

That was just the perfect fit. And in the playoffs, it hasn't worked out. I mean, they're still relying too heavily on McKinnon to provide offense. You do need that. I guess a team like Minnesota, you need more offense, and you need Brock Nelson to give you a little bit more than he's giving you right now. But you have Cadry again. Like, Godry's been a point per game player in this series, right? Like, I think you need Brock Nelson to be a chess piece.

You need him to be hard to play against. I continue to think he has been hard to play against. That's the role that he played on Team USA in their gold medal series. If I'm Colorado, they're the deepest center team in the league. I don't care which of my centers is driving the offense and which is shutting him down. I just need, on any given game, enough of them to be driving offense and enough of them to be shutting down my opponents. It's really incredible the difference in center depth in the series, isn't it?

Like Minnesota is built from the wings and has no centers and their best center is out, injured Joel Alex and Eck. I mean, Ryan Hartman is a nice player. not a number one center. He has been the number one center in Minnesota for years now. It's amazing. What they've built like this this outer shell of a team with defense and wingers. And they've just this empty, it's like a hollow Easter, uh, chocolate Easter bunny where there's

just nothing in the middle right now. I would probably still call Eric Sineck their number one. I know how they list them. And it's just like, that's who plays with Capriza. Capriza Center is your number one center. That's, well, that's fair, but also like who's your best center. Erickson's their best center. Exactly.

Right. So that's kind of how I see. But I get your point. It's interchangeable. And Hartman, frankly, is another guy who I think has kind of raised his profile for me as a guy who's like, hey, he looks every bit like he's a guy built for playoff hockey, right? Playoff two C, yeah. He is just like a Brandon Hagle, a Brad Marchand.

He's a pain in the ass out there. He's not huge, but he gets himself to the net. He's a difference maker. You just can't count on him to produce like a number one center has to produce. I think you're more worried about Colorado than I expected you to be coming out. I don't know. I feel like I'm surprising myself. by having this conversation because I just, I look at Minnesota and I know what they are.

And they played their game in game three. That's the Minnesota Wild that beat the Dallas stars. I still have concerns about their special teams. It's not good. And against Colorado, you can't afford to let their power play get going. It hasn't been good all year, but we know what they're capable of. I just, I don't know what you do if you're Colorado right now in goal. I think that's my primary concern is both options are pretty good and neither of them is great. And I don't, that's an uncomfortable spot to be in like, Minnesota knows who its guy is now. and its guy is Jasper Walsdet, and I just don't know if Colorado has that yet.

Whose goalie situation left in the playoffs would you take over the abs? Wow. I mean, probably Dobesh right now, just the way he's playing in Montreal, the confidence and the swagger he's got right now. You know, you know, I've made it clear how I feel about Freddie Anderson.

Yeah. Not that. Dostal has not been great, and Vegas's goalies are both not good at all. I mean, you might be right. It is interesting how there's this, We talk about Ilya Serochin and Igor Shestirkin and Vasselowski and Hellebuk. We put so much, we invest so much time and money and discussion into them.

And then it's these teams with these patchwork goaltending that seems to be the modern NHL, has spent $5 million on your two goalies combined and spend the money elsewhere. I don't know. It's an interesting dichotomy. Yeah, I mean, because I get where you're coming from on it. It's like whenever there's a goalie controversy, that's the instinct. But it's like they all are kind of all are one game away from a goalie controversy right now. Yeah, Lyon and Pekalukinan.

I mean, it's really, nobody feels probably spectacular about their goalie situation right now. It's pretty much dobish and maybe Walsett, but I think, you know, Walsett had a stinker to begin this series. He got pulled. He lost his job for a day. Yeah, for a game, right. So it's an interesting one. I still look at Colorado and I just think this is the deepest, best team in the league. And that's why, like, when I see the odds favor Carolina, I get your point. I think you're probably right that it's just the, the certainty of, hey, they're in the conference finals. No one else can say that. they have to be the favorite. But I went on a radio show yesterday and they were asking me, Carolina is the favorite now. And I was like, I'm not bailing on Colorado here.

Like Colorado, to me, has been wire to wire a juggernaut. No, they're the best team in the league. They have been the best team in the league. There's no question. I just, the way Minnesota played game three, it was a reminder that when they're playing their game, they can play with anybody. And, you know, I just, I wouldn't write them off yet.

I'm really fascinated to see what happens tonight. If they can do it two games in a row, you plant that seed of doubt in Colorado's mind and Colorado's had no doubt in their mind for eight, nine months now, then things get interesting. We're going to go to a break in a second here. Before we do, I meant to ask you one more thing while we were talking about the Vegas series, specifically what we were talking about Mitch Marner, is we talked about kind of the narrative and the scapegoating. And we talked about this on the prospect show last week after the lottery. But with the Leafs winning the lottery and the right to have the decision of whether they want to draft Gavin McKenna, do you think that the Marner narrative should or, will factor in on any of that because McKenna is a, you know, I don't know that he's going to be a Selky candidate, but he's a dynamic playmaking winger. You can score, obviously, but he is a guy who I think, certainly you saw it a little bit in college hockey this year when the games get the hardest. There's going to be some questions about if he gets to the inside enough, is he,

you know, is the kind of offense he creates translatable. He's got huge, huge upside, as Marner is, but do you think that should factor in it all for the Leafs and will it? Didn't you just yell at me on Slack this week when I even suggested that Gavin McKenna could be Mitch Martin because Gavin McKenna doesn't play defense? You specifically said, Selky caliber, blah, blah. I said he's, I don't think he's Selky caliber. That's what I said. But I do think they're, we talk about it on the show. Like, there's, there's rhyme to their offensive profiles.

I think that Toronto has been given a gift here in that John Chaka, his first major decision, he doesn't have to make a decision. Gavin McKenna, nobody will be mad if they take Gavin McKenna. He's been the number one guy. We've been talking about him for years. And even if he turns out to be a bust, nobody's going to be like, oh, they should have taken Chase Reed. Like nobody's thinking that right now. There is no pressure on Toronto to make this pick.

They take Gavin McKenna and they hope they're right. And if they were wrong, well, everybody thought this was the guy. There is zero pressure on this draft pick for John Chaka. For what it's worth, I agree. I think they should pick Gavin McKenna. I think he's the only guy that I look at in this class and say, that guy can have 100 points in the NHHA. And even if he does not get to that, it's possible that he won't.

But I think he's going to be a high, high producing player. Where Toronto sits right now, I don't think you can afford to pass that up. I get all the stuff about their blue line and that is it too similar to the bill that they just had. And like, there's time pressure. I get it to try to keep some of your stars that you have right now, specifically Austin Matthews. I just don't think anyone else has a better case for it than Gavin McKenna for either front. And picking a defenseman in this draft, number one, make A would be a reach. Anybody would tell you that's a reach.

But B, there's not a clear cut number one. There's like three or four guys in that discussion. You're opening yourself up to making one of the worst decisions you can make in this pivotal moment in your franchise's history. There's just, there's so much risk there that I don't think that Toronto, I think Toronto understands the optics here. And there's no chance they do anything bold or balzy here. It's Gavin McKenna all the way.

I wouldn't say it'd be a huge reach to go with a defenseman. Which one? Is it really? The Corels? Is it Verhof? Corey said Reed at one on his board at various points this year. I don't, I haven't seen his, I don't recall who is one on his most recent, but it might still be read. I don't think it would be crazy. I would take McKenna, but I don't think it would be crazy.

I mean, you can, you can reach for the defenseman at number six like Detroit did with Mo Cider all those years ago. Number one, you're going, that that fan base is already on edge so much. If you don't take Gavin McKenna, you are going, there's going to be pitchforks and torches and all that. We said the same thing about Shane Wright and Montreal in 2022. They took Slavkovsky. It has worked out fabulously for the Montreal.

I don't know if we said the same thing that you know. We absolutely did. Shane Wright tumbled a lot. I remember that draft. Shane Wright tumbled downboards a lot the end of year. Las, go back and look at the reaction when Corey mocked Slavkovsky to the Habs, the week of the draft. He took so much. And it was correct.

And it has proven to be the correct decision for Montreal, too. I'm not saying it's comparable. I think Gavin McKenna is a far, superior offensive prospect to Shane Wright. I think he's going to hit levels that justify the first overall pick. I would take Gavin McKenna if I was the Toronto Maple Leafs. I'm just not saying, I don't think it would be crazy to have the discussion and maybe even to reach that conclusion.

That's all I'm saying. From a PR perspective, it would be crazy. Toronto's got to think about this stuff after hiring John Jacobs, GM. Fair enough. All right. Let's say a quick break right there. We're going to come back. We're going to talk about some award stuff because now that we know all the finalists,

I think there's some fertile ground for discussion here. I'll be right back. All right, we are back, Lasz. And I just want to close today talking about some awards. Now that the finalists are out, I think we can have some discussions that we've kind of been around the edges of at various points. But now that we've seen how, well, maybe not exactly how people have voted, but what the voting has yielded for us here. I want to start with the Hart Trophy. I don't think any surprise on who the three finalists are.

You could have these three as finalists literally every single year. But the debate is about one of the guys who's not listed. And that's Macklin Celebrini. To me, Celebrini was four for me, so I don't have a problem with the three finalists. but it was obviously a hot talking point when it was announced. Celebrini was four for me also. I think the top four are almost indisputable. I think I spent more time hemming and hawing over number five on my heart ballot than

almost any other spot on this ballot. Even though I knew it was completely meaningless because like the top four were going to be the top four and number five had no chance of getting into that conversation. But I mean, McKinnick, I went McKinnon, Kucheroff, McDavid, Celebrini, that I had most sight are at number five. Yeah. I talked about it. I wanted to have Quinn Hughes, but I didn't even have them on my Norris ballots.

so I chickened out and I wound up wanting to my Norris pick, which was Mo Cider. Celebrini, I hate the discussion about, is it the best player or is it the most valuable player? We've been having this discussion forever and every writer is free to interpret it as they wish. I do think, generally speaking, all things being equal, a team that makes the playoffs, that player is more valuable than a team that doesn't because while Macklin Celebrini was the best player on his team by Light Years, he didn't make the playoffs or how valuable was he really, right? So McKinnon, Kuchrov McDavid, David all had similar seasons to Celebrini, if not better, and their teams were better. So, you know, it's splitting hairs, but Celebrini belongs on this ballot. It's totally fine that he's not in the top three.

It's not some egregious thing. McKinnon Kuturov McDavid, these are not scrubs that got in ahead of Macklin Celebrini. Macclan Celebrini will win heart trophies. He's going to be a finalist many, many times. But there are three players this year that were better than him. Is it fair that you said you have no problem with writers interpreting however they want? I feel the exact opposite. The league tells us what we're voting on. That is what we're voting on. I can't just say, oh, I actually think the team that scores the prettiest goals,

not the most goals should win the game. That's not what it is. Well, the PHWA has the right to take votes away from people that they start voting really stupid. And we've seen that before. Well, they might be coming for mine at some point then. Like, I agree. I mean, the Pearson Award is for the, or that that's that Lindsay. The Lindsay, yeah.

The Lindsay, yeah, we got renamed. The Lindsay Award is voted by the players for the most outstanding player. And Celebrini got in there. That's interesting to me. Was it Kutrov that was left out or was it? I think McKinnon. Was it McKinton? See, that's crazy to me.

That's just crazy. Yeah, he was atop my heart ballot. McKinnon of mine also. He was number one on mine. And it was really difficult to parse. It was not difficult for me to put Celebrini forth. It was difficult for me to decide one, two, three. Because those three guys, you know, it's almost impossible.

You're looking for like the tiniest little stat that could justify the feeling you have. And eventually you have to just go with your gut instinct of who is the most important player on their team. But I don't mind if people look at it a little differently. I know the wording is the wording, but we talk about this with the baseball Hall of Fame. There's always going to be subjectivity. It's supposed to be subjective, right? If it was an objective award, we would just go by like, we'd pick an analyst we like and Dom's game score decides who's the MVP every year. I don't want to do it that way.

I want there to be the human element to it. That's what makes this interesting. and the people that watch these guys on a daily basis, you know, form their opinions over the course of a year. It's not just people looking at stats. We watch a lot of hockey more than your average person does, and we see these guys live, and we talk to players around the league about them,

and you get an understanding of that we take these ballots seriously. And, you know, if you have a slightly different definition of what an MVP is, I'm okay with that, as long as you're within reason and not saying, like, you know, throwing some rando out there that has no business being on it. Yeah, I think as long as you had those foreign names in some order the top of your ballot, you're correct. I mean, you can make arguments for all of those players, the way McDavid finished the year, what Kuturov did after the Olympics. Personally, there was no

player I saw that was more dominant night tonight than Nathan McKinnon this year. And Macklin Celebrini, I think, carried his team at a level that no one else did. There is some splitting hairs to that in terms of like it is value to his team. And Celebrini was extraordinarily valuable to his team. I just have a hard time saying that any of Connor McDavid, Nick Nikita Kuturov or Nathan McKinnon were any less valuable to their team just because they also had more good players around them. I think the value that Nathan McKinnon and Nikita Kuturov brought was extremely evident whenever you watch them. Look, I'm a guy who had Devin Dubnick, number one on my heart ballot some years back. The year he was traded, I think it was from Arizona to

Minnesota, when he completely fundamentally altered that Minnesota team's trajectory. They went from nowhere to a contender based almost exclusively on Devin Dubnick and goal. So, you know, you can be that guy where you're the one reason, you know, obviously Nathan McKinnon has help and Connor McDavid has help and Nikita Kutrov has help. But there are years where one guy steps up and completely brings a team to the brink of success. And you can give it to him. The Taylor Hall year was a year where nobody else on that devil's team had done anything and he got that team into the playoffs. And the other guy in that year was Nathan McKinnon who was doing the same thing in Colorado and Colorado did not make the playoffs. So when you're splitting hairs,

making the playoffs matters. You know, how important were you if you couldn't even get your team into the Pacific Division playoff spot, no less. He was pretty important. He was very important. Number four of my ballot. Exactly. He was great. That is the tricky thing is like, I feel like if I have the rule of like you have to

make the playoffs to win it, shouldn't I just extend that to being on the ballot? And that's not how I've ever voted. And that's like a big cognitive dissonance for me. Well, we were talking about the Selkees trophy, right? And I was torn between Nick Suzuki's going to win that award. I was torn between Marner and Suzuki. And the fact is, Marner kills penalties. Nick Suzuki doesn't. You have to find a reason to separate those guys. But just because

Nick Suzuki doesn't really kill many penalties doesn't mean I drop him from my ballot completely. It's just tie goes to the guy who kills penalties. And Mitch Marner is a penalty killer. And when you're talking about a defensive forward, that matters to me. So making the playoffs in the heart ballot, that's a tiebreaker for me. And if it's all things being equal, I'm going to go with the guy who got into the playoffs over the guy who didn't. Yeah. You talked about the fifth spot being really hard for you on the heart ballot. All of the spots were very hard for me on the Norris ballot. The five spot was hard for you on the heart ballot because you were trying to find out which guy to put on there.

And I had a long debate about that too. I debated between the guy that I had for Norris, which I won't say right now because he's a finalist and I don't know what we're allowed to say. I guess I already kind of did that with heart. All right. I voted Vorensky fifth on the heart ballot. And then the guy who I think I really wanted to put on there was I felt like Nick Suzuki had a heart caliber season. Man, when you talk about 100 points and the guy who's going to win the Selki. like how is a guy that has that resume not on your heart ballot?

And that was my like kind of eternal debate that I went back and forth on. But generally. It was Quinn Hughes for me because Quinn Hughes fundamentally changed the way that Minnesota wild team looked to me more than any other player. And he wasn't even on my Norris ballot. Well, so that's where I'm going with this, right? It's like we're talking about who do you elevate because the four are so clear for heart. On Norris, it was like, who the heck do I cut? There were so many.

There were guys who I think had a legit case to win the award who are not on my Norris ballot. Rasmus Dahlene was not on my ballot, and it killed me not to have him on my ballot. He was probably number six or seven on my ballot. And it's just because I thought Mo Cider had a better all around year. Zach Worensky was number two. I had Lane Hudson number three,

because I'm not sure anyone had a season quite like him. Evan Bouchard deserved mention. Kail McCar, obviously, Quinn Hughes. There were so many guys this year that, again, you spend hours splitting hairs trying to justify the way, and you wind up just going in almost, because you can't split the hairs because they're all too good. There's kind of like a gut check for me at the end.

And usually like I try to sort through like, okay, who are the guys I think to have like a legit case for this? And then I sort, I put all those guys into like a query and I search their stats and I sort. And it was just like there's no separation here. Yeah. Like Kail McCar got beaten up a lot online for like, oh, how could McCar be in this is red?

Go look at Kail McCar's numbers this year. Tell me where he's weak. There's nowhere. The only thing you can come up with is he plays with Nathan McKinnon, who's a hard finalist. I'm sorry, I'm not ruling him out on those grounds. I think people can absolutely make the case that you should not rule out Evan Bouchard on those grounds. He was on my ballot.

And that's one. Like, if people start parsing these when we release all the votes, Bouchard over Dahlene and Quinn Hughes is the one that I'm going to get crap for, you can easily justify it. Evan Bouchard had a fantastic season. And he was a huge difference maker for that Edmonton team. And it's just, you know, it's, throw eight guys in a hat and pick out five because you can't go wrong. Yeah.

I mean, Quinn Hughes is, is, was. top three for me. And he's obviously not top three as a finalist. But I understand that. My guess is that because of what happened in Vancouver, that's two months of the year. That's a non-insignificant amount of the season. You say, okay, well, I can't put him on

there because those numbers were not as convincing. I took it the other way, though. Like, I looked, what did he do to Minnesota when he got there? He transformed them from a team that was like good to a team that if they get past Colorado, like, they can go to the Stanley Cup final. They can maybe win the Stanley Cup. His numbers there are

since he got to Minnesota. He's been a game changer. So, like, you can take these arguments every which way and say, like, oh, do you punish him for this or do you praise him for that? And I genuinely don't think you can have a wrong Norris ballot as long as, like, there's like eight or nine guys who I felt like belonged on ballots. As long as five of those eight or nine, like, I think you got a really good ballot. So the way you're describing it is exactly why I wanted to put Quinn Hughes five on my heart ballot, even though he's not on my Norris. I don't think he was necessarily one of the best defensemen, but he was certainly the most. I do. I mean, you can, what about Matthew Schaefer? Matthew Schaefer could have been on the Norris Bell. Absolutely could have been. Absolutely. What he had.

I mean, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, we are really in this golden age of defensemen. I think we're going to be having this discussion every spring for the next 10 years because these guys aren't going anywhere. They're all in their early 20s. Yeah. It's an amazing time for defense, man. I mean, there's the number, we, we talk so much about like, well, what does a number one D look like, what we're seeing right now is a number one D can look like a lot of different

things. It can look like Mo Sider. It can look like Quinn Hughes and Lane Hudson. It can look like. Matthew Schaefer. It can look like Brock Faber. I mean, there's different flavors to this. You got to be a great defender and you got to be able to put up offense. There's a lot of

guys right now doing both. Yeah, and you need one of these guys. If you're going to be a true dynamic team, you need someone on the back end that's just orchestrating everything, someone that can do what Quinn Hughes can do. What's interesting is like the team that's won the last two Stanley Cups, like Aaron Eckblood's awesome, Seth Jones is awesome.

Gustav Forzling is awesome. They've done it a different way. They have not had that, like true. Those are old school number one defenseman. That's right. Those are, those are like early 2000s, late 90s, number one defenseman. But they had Alexander Barkoff, who's kind of a number one everything. So that kind of helps. That's why he should have won the cons of my two years ago. How about Alexander Barkov as Hart Trophy winner this year? Clearly, Alexander Barker probably should have a heart trophy by now, whether it was, you know, it's hard because on any given year, you can look

at it and say, this is why you win with McDavid, this is why you went with McKinnon, this is why you went with Kutcherov. I just think we're going to get to the end of Barcoff's career and go, what, this guy was never a hard trophy winner. It's like the Gretzky-Lamu Yager corridor. There was just, you can't, you can't not vote for these guys because they're just so much, you know, what Barkov does is amazing, but he's also 70 points behind what those guys are doing. Yeah. It's ridiculous. Not 70.

Wow. 50. 40. It's a lot. It's a lot of boys. All right. Let's wrap there. That's going to do it for us.

Thanks for listening to episode of the Athletic Hockey Show. Sean and Frankie, you be back with you on Wednesday. We'll talk to you soon.