The Hockey PDOcast - How Vancouver’s Play Has Improved as the Year Has Gone Along

Episode Date: January 26, 2024

Dimitri Filipovic is joined by Harman Dayal to talk about the way the Canucks are playing, why they've gotten better as the season has gone along, and what it means for their ambition at this year's trade deadline. If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 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.

Progressing to the mean since 2015, it's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filippovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEDEOCast. My name is Dmitri Vilippovich and joining me here in studio to close out the week in style. My good buddy, Harmon Dile, what's going on, man? Having a blast, how about you? I'm having a blast, too. It's been a week, but I'm happy to always to have you on here. And we're going to talk about the Canucks, a team that, as we're recording,

is tied with the Boston Bruins for first and then HL and point percentage. and I'm clarifying that because our pal Thomas Drands is recording in the other studio, and I know if I go by just pure points, he's going to rush in here like the Kool-Aid man and start screaming at us. But they are by raw points. They're also four points up on the Jets. They have two more games play than them, but still, we're going to talk more about the significance of that in a second here. I think the reason why I want to have a full conversation with you, initially I was going to have you in, and we were going to do mailbag and kind of bounce around the league.

I know you're writing about a bunch of other stuff as well in the athletic, and we could have fun with that. But I really want to dive into this Canucks team and their performance this season because I think for the most part, the national discourse about them has been lagging a bit behind, I think, in terms of the teams on ice play. If you've been monitoring it from game one through game 48, the results have been pretty consistently positive, right? They've been winning a bunch of games and doing so with a good goal differential. But it really feels like as the year has gone along, their performance has improved. And a lot of the underlying indicators we look to try to figure out how they're going to play in the upcoming games have all ticked up as well. And I think that's very encouraging for people like you and I who are trying to sort of kind of look under the hood a little bit and try to figure out whether this is sustainable or not. Yet for whatever reason, it seems like every Kinnock's conversation is PDO go burr.

Right. And it's certainly still elevated. They lead the league, right? and when you're first in shooting percentage and second or third and say percentage the way they are, you're generally going to have that sort of high total. But I don't think that's necessarily fair in terms of encapsulating the trajectory of their season as these games have gone along. Absolutely. I'll say this. Of course, being somebody that is analytically inclined, the way that this team plays is a complete 180-degree turn compared to how they were before the coaching change. there's just so many factors that have gone right for this Canucks team and really at its core you have a roster where almost every player on the roster is exceeding expectations and of

course there are some parts of it such as the bottom six where you're like okay they're going to cool down a bit you're not expecting Sam Lafferty or Nils Hoaglander to to score at 20 plus goal rates on your fourth line that's of course a lot to ask for but legitimate Ultimately, this team has played a lot of sound hockey, and they're getting a lot of praise from opposing head coaches as well. I mean, Nashville's Andrew Burnett early in the season when Arizona came in, their head coach as well, noting that the Canucks are one of the NHL's best teams at pressuring the puck, which sounds crazy to say, considering again where they were a year ago. But it's true, they forced turnovers all over the ice. And when you look at why there's been such a night and day difference in their defensive play outside of just the goal tending, so much of it starts in the offensive zone with how dominant that forecheck is and how it allows them to really control play.

And lines 1 to 4, all of them can do that. And really, it's been interesting because I think it's easy to go on NHL.com and look at the point and goal leader. and go, oh, it's just the stars carrying them, right? Pedersen, Miller, Hughes, Bessor, those guys have been magnificent, but quietly at 5 on 5, the top of the lineup among, you know, the first and second lines, there are actually quite a few nights where they aren't their sharpest

because they're a little bit too reliant on Pedersen and Miller. I'm sure we'll get to that later as we discuss. Deadline needs, but their bottom six legit carries play. It's not just the inflated shooting percentage and PDO. last I checked a couple weeks ago, the Canucks had like a 53% control of expected goals when Patterson and Miller are on the bench. Right.

So this is a team that their third line, especially with Garland, Blugher, and Joshua has been one of the best third lines in the NHL. The fourth line, Hoaglander and Lafferty are operating at a great rate outside of just the goal scoring, just how they use their speed to win battles. This supporting cast is completely different. different than the one we saw last year, even when we talk about the blue line, it's a totally

different team. Well, and the reason why I wanted to really just unpack the context of this season they're having is I had our pal, Kevin Woodley on earlier this week, and we got into a brief sort of surface level conversation about this, but I thought having you here in studio, we could sort of really just unpack all of it and get into the nitty-gritty and the details of it is this is a team that is first in the league in time leading by like over 200 minutes, I think, this season, right? They've led for 51% of their game time, which is just stunning this late into the season. And they've also trailed, I think, the second fewest amount of time as well, which makes sense. If you're leading a lot, you're probably not going to be then trailing as well.

I think the Bruins are the only team that's trailed less than than they're around like 18% of their game time. And I'm fascinated by this idea of how game state and scoreboard are influencing some of these underlying results for them. And I think that's an important conversation and part of it is tough to parse because it's it's chicken or the egg and and what I mean by that is the top three teams in terms of fewest time spent trailing are the Bruins Canucks and Jets the top three teams and team safe percentage this season are the Bruins Canucks and Jets and so on the one hand and and and I think right hellabuck and demko in some order or one two in pretty much every Vesna conversation and then Swamen I think would be if he wasn't sharing

so many starts with onus on mark this season but You get into this fascinating sort of theoretical exercise, I guess, of like, are these teams leading so frequently because they're getting such good goal tending? Or are they, like, continuing to lead throughout the game because of the alternative? Because for me, like, I think we know that score effects are a real thing, right? But also, the way you play when you're leading versus trailing changes dramatically for most teams, right? When you're trailing, you start pushing a lot. You start sort of sacrificing shock quality for shock quantity because you just start trying to get as many pucks on net and trying to get back in the game. Whereas if you're leading, you sort of sag back a little bit.

But then because the other team is so aggressive in their own offensive approach, if you get the puck out of the zone, chances are you're going to have a chance for like an odd man rush counter opportunity, right? And I think we're seeing that with this Canucks team a little bit where Sport logic has them with 4.8 rush chances per game this season. They're the only team in the league below five, right? And so on the surface, it's like, all right, so much of hockey in 2024 is a rush-based approach. I've done a lot this past week talking about the flyers at how much I admire, how like they're this insanely rush-heavy team. So it sounds like I'm kind of talking out of both sides of my mouth. But I think in this case, it's sort of by design, right? Like I'm sure the Canucks would like to get out more in transition and attack off the rush.

But it feels like when they do, they're very dangerous opportunities. and I think a lot of that is guided by what's happening on the scoreboard, if you know what I mean. Absolutely, and we've seen it just this past week where you look at the Saturday game against the Leafs, the Canucks go up 3-0-3-0 in the first period, and the number of games where, forget just getting a lead, but getting it so early in the games, scoring within the first 10 minutes, as the Canucks have done really often this year, they do that, and from that point on, like the Canucks had a dominant first 10 minutes, but you look at the end of the game and the Leaves had double the shots.

Well, a big part of that was because the Canucks were went out 3-0. Yeah. In the Chicago game, Canucks were dominant through the first 10 minutes or so when you're thinking, oh, this is going to be a romp of this Black Hawk team without Badaard. But as soon as they get to 2-0, they sort of just put it in cruise control

and Chicago starts to come on and they create a lot of shots. And you can just tell, especially a team like Vancouver, that is so reliant on playing an aggressive up-tempo, we're going to pressure the heck out of you. When they go up in games, it's hard to maintain that same level of tenacity when you have something to lose. And then the most recent game against St. Louis, one of the rare times that the Canucks

go down to nothing. And it's a game that they dominated in terms of shots. Yeah, they started playing way differently because they had to. Exactly. And you could just see, okay, they recognize their trailing. They're playing extremely free. and you see what it does for them in terms of territorial dominance against that blues team. So absolutely, you're right.

There is something there, I think, to how much they're leading. And even the score-adjusted shot metrics, perhaps not fully accounting for that. Well, I think their statistical profile in terms of the volume and then where the shots are coming from at both ends of the ice are so intriguing to me and paint a really compelling picture that extends just way beyond. the superficial shot, save percentage, and our sort of conventional understanding of them, because defensively, they give up the fewest rush chances in the league,

which is stunning for someone who watched them play last year, for example. There's sixth and expected goals against the corner sport logic, and their ninth and fewest slot shots allowed. Now, all of these are massive improvements from, as recently as last year as we talked about. A lot of that goes, I think, credit to Rick Tocke and the job he's done. And sort of, we always wonder about coaching impact, and like how much of it is randomness, how much of it is all these different factors and how much of it unfairly or like gets attributed to coaching, right?

Generally you get good results. It's like, oh, the coach is doing a good job. All of a sudden, the puck stops going in or you don't get saves. It's like, oh, the coach needs to go. And in this case, though, I think fundamentally, like the design and the approach of where these shots are coming from and how they're playing can be so neatly and directly traced back to, I think, what he wants this team to look and play like. And so for me, that is really interesting.

offensively, they're 27th in shots, their 25th in shot attempts, but they're ninth in inner slot shots themselves and their third in offensive zone possession time. And I think when you put all of these things together, it's kind of exactly what we're saying, which is they're leading a lot, they're holding onto the puck deep in the offensive zone, they're kind of grinding out possessions. And I think that's in big part why this state percentage, for example, is as high as it is, right? Like, Dr. Dempco has been phenomenal. He's healthy this season and he deserves all the accolades he's going to get. But for me, if you just look at the sort of environment for him, it's so night and day compared to last year. And I think it's not random or PDO fueled in that way.

I think it's actually like the result of a very sound change and approach that this team's made. Absolutely. The rush side of it is massive because one of the biggest differences you notice, immediately upon Tauket taking over was him making it a non-negotiable that the forwards have to manage the puck responsibly through the neutral zone. So we can talk about their lack of offense off the rush. That's by design. They want to dump and chase, create that way, because they know that for not turning it over at the offensive blue line, we're not going to give up chances off the rush, especially now that the forwards are also providing a lot better back pressure. So ironically, their rush defense dominance starts with them consciously deciding that, hey, we're not going to be a high volume controlled entry, making pretty plays off the rush type of team.

We're going to be a blue collar, just gain the red line and rely on winning a lot of puck battles, controlling the boards, that sort of way. And then even their offense, it's been so interesting to see the way that they will recover pox down low, shift it. from low to high and they're I think one of the NHL's best teams at getting traffic in front screens deflections rebounds and their defensemen especially when you look at Hughes and Heronick do a masterful job of shooting for sticks and consistently hitting them on target so you have I think a lot of situations where like the Toronto game is a perfect example in that third period where the Canucks went up three nothing they sort of control that net front area offensively. They won

a lot of those second chance opportunities and it's not just the big guys. It's not as if they have a size advantage because actually statistically, the Canucks forwards are one of the smaller groups but you have tenacious guys like Garland and Hoaglander that really fight for chances are Uber competitive

and they just seem to always be in sync. You watch them in the offensive zone and they talk about attacking in layers. There's always somebody bothering the the goaltender sightline, whereas defensively, it's often the opposite where they've added some meat and potatoes on the back end, guys like Susie, who, of course, has fortunately been

plagued by injuries, but Ian Cole, even someone like Noah Juleson, who I didn't think was going to be particularly good, as a result of that, they're, Zedorov, another example, as a result of that, they're a team that boxes out well in front of their own net. They don't give up a lot in terms of losing battles around the front of their net defensively. And I think that's a big reason why when it comes to the quality side of things that they control play. What's their PDO at right now? Do you know it off the up your head? It's like 105 still or something like that.

It's very inflated still. Certainly. I'm not trying to make the argument that the things that Canucks do result in a 105 PDO, you know, that that running joke in hockey Twitter. What I will say though is I do think this paints like a compelling picture of strategically trying to play a certain way and then obviously masterfully executing that. And that's the reason why I brought up like the shot volume in terms of attempts compared to inner slot and then offensive zone possession time, which I think sort of quantify exactly what you're seeing when they're playing at their best, right? I think they're not necessarily just spamming low percentage shots. It seems like much more sort of accountable this year in terms of passing the puck down, trying to extend the possession, looking for a better play in tight, right? And I think that's being reflected by the shooting percentage.

Now, the one concern that I would have, I guess, is like the sequencing of the scoring where regardless of I think how well you're playing or how well you're executing, there's going to be times like that blues game the other night where something weird happened. and the other team just goes up early, right? And like you're just no matter what, you're probably not going to keep winning or leading 51, 52% of your game time, right? I think that's going to regress. And so when that happens, they're going to have to open it up more and play a different way, right? I think it's like very easy to sort of map out,

all right, we go up early and then we can really skip to our script in terms of what we want to do and the notes we want to hit in both zones and then reinforce everything, right? whereas if you go down 2-0,0, 3-0 early, and then all of a sudden you kind of have to throw that out of the window and start taking more chances and trading rush chances and opening things up, this team certainly has players who I think could benefit offensively

from that type of environment, but maybe that would all of a sudden start to show more kind of cracks in the armor, I guess, or maybe these concerns with this roster if they were forced to play that type of game more often. Yeah, that's a really good point. I hadn't considered it through that lens as much. And to that point, I think it's going to be important, of course, for them to upgrade the top six. But also, if they want to go deep in the playoffs, their power play needs to be on point.

I know on paper, last I checked it was still top 10 in the NHL overall. But as of a week ago, I know they scored a couple power play goes lately. But between like December 1st to roughly call it mid-January, their power play was in the 20s, I think, somewhere around 24th in the NHL. which when you speak about the possibility of later down the stretch and going into the playoffs, the sequencing of these goals potentially changing, and now you may be in a situation where you're going to have to come back in games. That power play needs to be a massive difference maker for them, and it's been interesting because they've had to adjust without Beauorvet in the bumper,

who for a three-year stretch there was their highest goal score on the man advantage. They're still trying to find that fourth forward to really click because it doesn't seem like Kuzmanko is going to be a fit with this team in the medium term, and he's already been bumped off that top unit. Recently, they've been going with Pia Suter, and he scored against St. Louis had a third-period hat trick, but I don't think he had to- Which the fans didn't even really realize until after the fact

and some belated hat started raining down on the ice afterwards, but that was pretty funny. I know, poor Suter, because even in the aftermath of that game, there was all that talk about Pedersen and the OT and all the postgame quotes that came out that everybody just like forgot about his at trick. But anyway, I don't think he's the answer in the bumper on the first unit. I mean, he's never, he had like seven power play points before this season. He is scoring goals this year, but he's not a high-end finisher.

And for Vancouver to go deep in the playoffs, I think they need their power play to be a massive difference maker. So that's, again, an area that I'm looking at and going, that needs to get back on track for them to hit their potential as a team. Well, and what's interesting about it? Let's talk a little about that bottom six then because I think you're right. We've spent so much time talking about the seasons that from a goal scoring department that Bessor is having, Miller, Petterson with his upcoming contract,

and we'll get into that a little bit. Obviously, Quinn Hughes, right? Like the top players have been eating offensively and you look atop the leaderboard in points and they're there. But it's so interesting how they've got this weird setup. up now where the top six and bottom six kind of play much differently and actually the bottom six is posting very elite underlying metrics and really dominating the play and i think doing exactly everything we just talked about that i think rick tockett wants them to do right like you watch that

game on hogging end in canada against the leaps and in that first period it was garland and joshua and and hoglander's line that we're giving the leifs a lot of problems with exactly this right that puck pursuit, grinding offensive zone possessions, just making them, like punishing them below the goal line and then turning those loose pucks and turnovers into scoring chances, right? And I think that's how you get the types of shot metrics and chance metrics that like Garland's line has, for example, but you almost need to separate the top six from the bottom six right now just in terms of both results, but also I think like stylistically what they're trying to accomplish, which is really interesting to me because often we hear how like coaches want

the whole team to play a certain way, right? And then it's like, one size fits all, and in this case, it's very, very delineated, I think, between the two. Yeah, I mean, it's pretty remarkable how much Garland is, I mean, look, Joshua and Bluger have been

excellent, but both of them have been fourth line caliber players for the most part before this year. So the fact that they're now having career years on one of the best third lines in the NHL, looking at basically any metric you want to look at, whether it's shot metric.

chance, metrics, actual goals for and against. It's a massive testament to Garland as the sort of underrated engine of this team's five-on-five play because it's easy for out-of-market fans to look at his point totals and go, guys going at half a point in a game, decent player, nothing special, but really what he does for that line to transition pucks up the ice, what he does to win battles, what he does as a playmaker to set things up for Joshua and Bluger, how connected they are as a line when they break out, and always knowing where the next play is going to be,

how the control play down low, how little they surrender defensively because of how dogged Garland, Joshua, and Blugher are on the back check, how smart they are positionally. It's, they've been Vancouver's most consistent line this year. There's been a lot of games where, again, outside of lately the lot of line when it first got, put together in early January.

Outside of that sort of stretch, there's been a lot of nights where top six gets outshot, outplated even strength, and it's on the back of that garland line that they're able to score the first goal and in that line sort of drags a team into the fight. Honestly, like four out-of-market fans, that's probably the most underrated part, the most overlooked component of this Knochstein. Yeah, I think their work rate and just the motor is just, it's, it's, such a handful. Like you're seeing, especially if they get out there against a third pair or a bottom

six line for the other team, like how outclass those guys are and how they're able to leverage that into just punishing them time and time again. I've got it down. Joshua and Garland, they haven't spent the full season playing with Lugar, obviously they have recently, but just those two as a combination of 515. 400 minutes this season, 57% shot share, 62% high danger chance share, 61.4 expected goals share up 20 to 9 and garland and Joshua have 18 515 goals combined and they've drawn 27 penalties between the two of them right like what you're getting from those two guys is so fascinating now garland obviously you know there was that talk at the start of the year where like he was either asked for a trade or was like hoping the conucks would facilitate something i think the team was pretty open about looking for a suitor and really just i think the reality of the market right now where wingers making between four and five million with future money attached to them generally are not viewed

as assets in the league. And we'll get more into that when we talk about because man, on a second here. But what's interesting about this Canucks team as you look ahead is, I think they did such a masterful job as an organization this past summer of finally taking the right approach in terms of like smart, low risk calculated bets without term attached to them with a lot of the signings and moves they made, right? And that was such a departure from the way this organization's acted in the past where it was

like, yeah, you get a four or five-year contract and you get money and you get term. And like everyone in the open market would just get anything they want. It was like they're writing their own contracts. And in this case, they take all like, oh, it's a lot of these one, two-year deals, very sort of savvy stuff. And now all these guys are having career years basically. And so it's kind of a double-edged sort of a blessing and a Chris because now I think a lot of guys like a Joshua and Bluegar and Pew Souter are going to be significantly more expensive than they pre-eater. previously were under the deal they signed with the Canucks. And now it's going to be another test for this organization, I think,

in terms of how they respond to that, whether they get sucked into the success and then wind up picking up the tab on it or whether they feel like they can just go out and find the next guys that'll fit that mold. Like, we'll get our answer, obviously, I think, this summer. But just I'm fascinated to see how they approach that dilemma in terms of, like, how they respond to the success that all these guys, who are up for new deals or having as career seasons.

Yeah, especially because they also have a lot of UFAs on the back end. Yeah, for sure. And so this is where I crunched the numbers about a week ago, where last year when Quinn Hughes was on the bench, so you got the second or third pair on the ice, the connects were minus 43 in terms of their 5-and-5 goal differential. It felt like whenever the bottom four was on the ice last year, they just could not move the puck. It was awful, right?

You had the OEL Myers pair disaster. This year, they've, of course, brought in Coles, Adorov, Susi, Myers has had a bounce back year. Juleson's been solid when he's been in the lineup. And they've been plus 13 in non-quehune-use minutes, which is pretty remarkable because they went out, and last year at the deadline, got Philopronick, and a lot of people, including myself, assume that, okay, you want to balance your high-end top for defense, and so let's, you know, perhaps split Hughes and Hironica up. That was, you know, thought process.

In training camp, I think they pretty quickly realized that we don't have the ideal partner for Hughes if we use Hironica on the second pair, so they just went, okay, we're going to play these guys together. And it's been remarkable that the second and third pairs, which essentially they're, it's more like there isn't really a defined second and third pair. It's more like a bottom four that plays relatively even

minutes and it's just full of number four or five defense men. Right. A bunch of really tall guys. A bunch of really tall guys. And the biggest surprise is like yeah, you expect them to improve your defensive results, but puck moving wise, they've been totally fine. They haven't had issues with breakouts,

which has in years past been a massive pain in the rear for this Canucks Blue Line. So, So then when you shift the conversation to these depth pieces, a lot of these UFAs, I think it is a big reason why the Canucks are incentivized to go for it a bit this year. Because you're going to have to pick up the tab on some of these guys, not to mention Patterson contract, Heronic Contract as well. So this is probably the best your cap situation is going to be. So even though it's on the one hand, a lot of people may assume, oh, it's the first year the Knax are going to be are good. They're going to have a really long window for contention here.

They can afford to be patient. That's not really the case here because this might be a unique opportunity where you got so many guys in the middle of careers. Probably not going to be able to afford to keep everybody. I think that's a strong reason to make additions at the deadline. Yeah, it's kind of the cruel nature of this sport. also a hard cap world. I know it's going up by $4 million or whatever for this upcoming season, but it's like you make a lot of smart bets.

You scout or develop or whatever you find pieces that fit and get the most out of them, but then you can't afford to fall in love with them because that's how you make mistakes, right? And it's almost like it really is a blessing and a curse. Let's take a quick break here. And then when we come back, we'll pick things up with harm and we'll keep talking about the Canucks. you're listening to the Hockey P.D.O.cast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. All right, we're back here on the Hockey PEDYOCast with Harman Dile and Studio closing out the week on the PEDEOCast. Harm, so before we went to break, you were talking sort of about this concept of the window for the Canucks, right?

And certainly for a team that has had a really rough past couple seasons, this is the first year of success in a while for the organization, right? And generally, in that case, you'd look at it and go, wow, this is the first of many. Like, we can look forward to this. And I think certainly with a core of hopefully Eliza Petterson for a long time, Quinn Hughes, Thatcher Demko, Annette, like these are all players who are firmly in the meat of their prime seasons. And this isn't necessarily a one-off, but a lot of the names around them probably will have to change over time. I'm kind of curious for your feel on the level of aggression within the organization in this upcoming trade deadline because it's obviously been a group that is very willing and almost eager at times to make trade certainly. So I think they will be exploring all the options.

But just in terms of how much they're going to go for it this season because they are first in the West, there's a lot of things to like about this team. And there's also a lot of questions and unknowns about what it's going to look like as soon. as next season. So where are you at with this in terms of the approach, I guess, between now and whatever, the deadline is like five weeks or so in terms of how this team's going to act? I expect the Kinex to be aggressive. We heard Jim Rutherford recently sort of asked about the topic of their deadline approach.

And he highlighted that, yeah, there's a risk with going forward at the deadline. but he also highlighted that there's risk in not going for it and not taking advantage of your window when it feels like everything is perfectly aligning for you. That I think right there, when he mentions the risk of not going for it and sort of says that they're also comfortable with the risk of, hey, sometimes you make a move, you sort of go for it and it doesn't work out. plus you combine it with Rutherford's history in Pittsburgh where he was never shy of making big splashes. I think the writing's on the wall in terms of them being aggressive and sort of I look at this situation where you have Pedersen right now, finally over his deal making $7.35 million,

Hironic in the mid-fours, both of them are going to require massive extensions and of course all the other depth of UFAs that they have. I think back to Colorado in the year that they won the cup, I think it was one of the final years of McKinnon's sweetheart $6.3 million deal. They had Kadri and Burakowski, and you could sense that they felt the importance of going for it with this window of contracts. They weren't sitting back and going, well, we have McKinnon, McCar,

Nuchuchin, another example of a player that was going to need a raise pretty soon. A Bowen Byram was on his ELC, and I think he led the team in like 5-on-5 ice-time in the Stanley Cup final. Exactly. And so they went for it at the deadline. And I think it also goes to show that going for it doesn't mean trading all your good picks and prospects for rentals. They went out and acquired Arturi Lekidin, paid a pretty hefty price at the time, but he was the perfect fit for them, unbelievable through their copper, and has been a great fit since then, Josh Manson.

And we've seen with a team like Colorado now when they have all these new contracts to pay out that, yeah, they have the same talent at the top of the lineup, but their middle six isn't anywhere near what it used to be, and it's been, you know, they're still a contender, but that was their best chance earlier than maybe many would have thought of considering how young that team was. Now, I'm not to say that the situation,

with the Canucks is totally fair comparable, but that's the sort of thought process you have to have is, in today's NHL, you can't look just at the age of your core. You have to look at what contracts do we have? What's the timeline of when we're going to have to pay guys? In Vancouver's situation, they have to do something, especially within this window where they have Hughes at under $8 million

and Dempco at $5 million. So that gives you, what, another three-ish years or so? it's not the longest window. No, it's not. And you certainly got to optimize it. And, you know, I'm generally wanting to kind of take more of a cautious calculator approach. Like, all right, let's not go crazy trading everything just for a season where you might lose in round one, for example, right? Like, you want to extend this thing.

But I think there's a couple things working in the favor of a very aggressive approach for this season. One is obviously, well, I think we talked about at the top of the show, which was it's not, just that they have kept winning, but they've, like, the underlying process has improved a lot, and a lot of the indicators suggest that they're playing much better as well along the way. Two, this is an organization that hasn't had a home playoff game since 2015, right? They obviously had that special season right before the pandemic and then made a bit of a run in the bubble, but that was a unique circumstance where they didn't get to play in front of their home fans. They've got, like I had our pal Thomas Drans on, I think last week now, I don't know,

all the days are blending together, but we had a full episode talking about Eliza Pedersen and all the calculus surrounding his next contract. And he's made it very clear that the thing he prioritizes above all else is being in a competitive environment where he feels like he feels like he can play meaningful, important games competing for a Stanley Cup. And so I think if you're getting to the point where he even said, like, we're going to wait until after the season to talk and figure this out, I imagine seeing this thing through and actually getting to play meaningful playoff games this year will go a long way towards convincing him to sign a contract that says eight years on it as opposed to like three or something like that.

So there's that. And then there's also the fact that around them, I know a lot's been made of kind of like how open things are atop the league this year and how there's no real consensus favorite. I think the Western Conference is very clearly superior to the East right now. that would be scary. But one of the developments of the Oilers going on this massive run they've been on is I think a lot of the fear about like winning the West and then getting the Oilers as a wildcar team in round one has been alleviated, right?

Because that obviously would have been a disaster. And in this case now, it really looks like the one seat in the West will most likely, assuming the Kings figure this out a little bit and stop just playing absolutely horrendously, will most likely be like Nashville or Arizona. or I guess maybe Seattle, right? Like it's going to be a team that I think is pretty clearly inferior in a lot of ways to an Edmonton or L.A. or even Vegas that they fell off and fell into a wildcard spot, right?

So I think making a push for finishing not only first in the Pacific but first in the West and they're competing with Winnipeg but also with Colorado and Dallas and whoever comes out of those three is also a kind of motivating factor for like improving your team as much as you can for the rest of the regular season because all of a sudden if the path is all right we're going to get to play Arizona in round one and then in round two we're going to play whoever survives a bloodbath between Vegas and Edmonton like all of a sudden that seems much more encouraging for a sustained long playoff run than whatever I guess it looked like it might be as recently as

two or three weeks ago absolutely and it is pretty crazy how like a month ago um it looked like yeah the Canucks would have a shot at the Pacific, but Vegas and L.A. were right there. It's pretty remarkable. Of course, Vegas getting banged up by a ton of injuries, L.A. completely falling off the map that now the main threat for the Canucks is, ironically, the Oilers, who've, of course, been on this massive tear, but they're still the favorites. Plus, here's the other thing to keep in mind when it comes to this idea of sort of, quote, unquote, going for it. Canucks win their division, regardless of how deep they go in the playoffs,

their first-round pick is going to be in the mid-20s or later. Like you think about Colorado last year, they, of course, got eliminated in round one by Seattle, but because they won the Central, they picked 27. Right. So that's something to keep in mind when you're valuing your first-round pick in Vancouver shoes at the deadline is, there's a good chance that pick is going to be deep into the 20s. You look at the data, first-round picks are not created equal, and the value really drops off in the 20s.

Yeah, going from like 18th overall to 26th is, it's almost like, it's basically a second rounder at that point. Exactly. So that chip, to me, is super expendable. Plus, when you're talking about wanting to put Patterson in a situation where he's comfortable staying, it'd be unbelievable to go out and be able to get him a quality winger because I bet that he's not.

not been thrilled having to lug around Ilya Mikhail and Andre Kuzmanko, even Sam Lafferty at points earlier in the season. How much of a blast would he have playing with a legit running mate who could also drive play, also produce chances? I'm sure that would go a long way and it's legit need for this team because when I look at them as a potential playoff team, they still have. too many games where that top six does lose the territorial battle, I don't think that's an indictment on Patterson or Miller by any means.

I think that's more reflection that, hey, they're the only real drivers in the top six. And so if one of them has an off night, nobody else on that line can pick up the slack, which you might think looking at somebody like Brock Bassler with all the goals that he has, right? Oh, it must be a play driver. He's not really. He's a finisher. It's not somebody that has the speed or dynamic puck play to transition play up the ice, to create chances on his own. Everybody else in the top six is reliant on Miller and Pedersen being the ones to create chances because McAev is a passenger,

because Manco has been a passenger this year, and the left winger that has typically been next to Miller and Besser this year, whether it's been Suter or early in the year, D.Juseppe, Hoaglander for a bit. they're passengers slash complimentary players as well. And it's really noticeable that, hey, if J.T. Miller has a game where he's, you know, a couple of turnovers in the defensive zone, he's not sharp. It's like, oh, well, nobody else on this line is going to do the heavy lifting to get us out of the defensive zone to transition puck's up the ice to create scoring chances on their own. That's not a recipe you want going into the playoffs. Well, and what's interesting as well is I think they could approach it any number of ways. Like I think just adding a talented needle moving player pretty much anywhere in the lineup, I think, would be a valuable addition.

And that might even be in the form of a defenseman. Like we've heard a lot about Chris Tanna, for example, and that potential fit. And then that may be freeing up the situation where you actually could split up Hughes and Hronick. And maybe Hronick can carry his own pair and give you a different look that way. I just did a show about the avalanche and was talking about how both them and the jets, I think, have such an obvious need for a second line center that there's going to be a really fascinating bidding war that emerges, I think. And there's so few names that make sense in that regard. Like it seems like every conversation is basically a last land home or people talking themselves into Adam Henrique because he's the most likely alternative.

And so you don't want to get into a situation where it's like, all right, well, that's all right, well, that's all we does. really need. And so now we're going to get into that with those teams. In this case, you could just go and add a winger to help Pedersen or if you do decide that, all right, the acquisition cost actually isn't that exorbitant. You could potentially, like J.T. Miller might be the winger that you're looking for for Lise Patterson and then you bring in a center who might not necessarily be as dynamic, but can give you like, just keep you your head above water, I guess, territorially at five on five. And that might be the approach. I don't know. There's any number of ways I think could go. Yeah, I'm sure

Transnight will do a full deep dive soon in terms of potential targets, but I think one of my dream ideal fits, considering that you'd get multiple playoff runs out of him, and I know it's probably unrealistic in the sense of why would they trade him as

Pavel Buccanevich, as a guy that can drive play, had 79 points in 74 games last year, smart 2A player, could also help you on the penalty kill. I just look at him as like a great fit stylistically for what this team wants. And of course, I think he has one year left after this one.

So you get multiple playoff runs out of him. And so if St. Louis is falling out of it, could that be the type of piece that you try and make a big push for? I don't think the Blues would have the greatest appetite to move him. But if they are committing to this retool and they look at Buccinovich's next contract, what it would take to keep him, maybe they are at least open to listening.

And so, I mean, that's an example of a player that I like in the sense that you don't just want a finisher. I mean, sure, any top six player will be a good addition. But if you just acquire a guy that can put the pocket in the back of the net, but he's reliant on somebody to feed him all these chances, that still puts you in a position, I think, where, again, if Pedersen has an off night or if Miller has an off night that at five, and five, you're going to lose that matchup, whereas if you hopefully acquire a guy that can also pick up the slack and being able to transport pox up the ice, have some offensive zone creativity, amplify Pedersen and Miller as well, make them better, that I think that diversifies your top six a little bit and make sure that you don't have sort of all your eggs

in a couple of baskets. I mean, you don't have to sell me on Powell Buchenevich, obviously as people who listen to the show, no, I've been on a big fan of his for years. Hearing you speak, though, and this might fall even more so into the camp of, I'm not sure he's available right now or what it would take to convince the team to go this route. But man, Travis Keneckney is from everything you're mentioning there in terms of, and he's basically like a supercharged version of everything we just said about the bottom six, right?

It's like pace, puck pursuit, motor, competitiveness with also he's going to score 40 goals this season and he has that next year as well under contract I imagine he would be a Rick Tocke favorite immediately and would make this team so much better now he's playing really well I think Philadelphia obviously loves him as well

he might just be there long term as they see this rebuild through but man I much prefer going that route and potentially paying a little bit more to actually get someone of real substance for multiple runs as opposed to sort of the traditional trade deadline approach, which is like second round pick and prospect or whatever for a guy who is going to come and go and not really actually make much of a mark, right? So I don't know.

I'd be so fascinated with that. And I think from just this conversation and everything we're talking about, that might actually be a palatable choice for this front office, right? Like talking themselves into actually going that route and paying a lot for a player like this as opposed to the alternative. Yeah, I'd 100% pay the premium because, again, I think back to what happened with Boston last year, for example, right? This isn't a case of, you know, where you're side-eyeing the Canucks quality as a contender. I mean, Boston last year was on this historic regular season path and they go out and they make big splashes as well for Orlov, Bertuzzi.

And it made sense on paper because, hey, Bergeron and Craig She, you, they're probably going to be gone at the end of the season, may as well go for it. But both of them actually performed pretty well. Bertucci, I think, led the Bruins and goals and points in that playoff series. Orlov had eight assists in seven games as well. And yet, you get eliminated in round one, and it just feels like, oh, what could have been with those pieces, right? So, yeah, I'm definitely with you in the sense that I agree sort of with the idea of pay an extra and, you know, like Tampa did it really well. when they went out and

Coleman, of course, yeah. Goodrow, Hagle. Hagle. Of course, I liked what Colorado did with Lekinen. Even different positionally, but look at what a game changer was for the Oilers to go and get Mitya Secombe.

So you pay that price, but you get a player that's actually part of your core, not just a rental that you graft on temporarily. That's definitely what I would be trying to do if I was in the Canucks position. Yeah, and on the one hand, I think I'd be wary of taking on future money because of all the unknown, but at the same time, like, locking in a net positive contract for beyond this season, I think would also alleviate a few headaches as well, right?

Like, it's like, all right, we've got this player and he's going to live up to that. And then that's one last thing to worry about. And we know now what our internal budget is heading into the offseason, whereas, like, you just bring in another rental or something. And then you enter this summer, it's like, all right. we basically have to fill X number of spots and we have no idea how much money we have left or even if we have enough and who's going to be here and it becomes a whole mess of its own. Yeah, I'm actually going to do an article pretty soon here looking at the history of

every team in the last decade that's traded a first round pick for rental, how it panned out, how deep they went on the playoffs. And I don't have the numbers in front of me, but you do not get a good return on Yeah, and anecdotally, it doesn't seem to have a huge success rate. Yeah, I mean, people would point out somebody like in Ivan Barbership last year is, oh, rental, they won the cop. That's for a point. But number one, he was more in that second tier of rental where they gave up Zach Dean,

who was a former late 2021 first round pick who hadn't been trending great. So that's more you're giving up. It's not like giving up a first round pick. You're giving up a prospect in lieu of like a second or a third. So it's a second tier of play. plus they resigned him. They had the cap space and understood that, okay, if there's a good fit here, we can keep the guy. Same thing with what L.A. did with Gavakov, right?

And, of course, Corpus all was part of the trade as well. But this understanding that, okay, if a guy fits well, we know, we're pretty confident that we can keep him. That's a much different conversation than we're going to go out and, let's say, acquire a piece like Jake Gensel. I was going to say, Schmeek-Schmenzel, something of the reminds of that. That we love a stylistic fit, but can you realistically afford him beyond this season? Probably not, unless you gut out a lot of contracts and are really creatively thinking outside of the box. That's probably not the best bang for your box. All right, harm, we got to get out of here, end the week.

This is a good segue then, because you're mentioning how you're going to be working on this. Let the listeners know where they can check you all. but also what else you've got in the works or what you've done recently that they can check out. Yeah, I do a lot of Canucks and national work at the Athletic. Had some good stuff this week looking at the Calder Race, can favor knockoff, Bedard, did under the radar 10 trade candidates with Chris Johnson,

which is always fun looking at some guys that have been falling out of favor. And, yeah, I have a lot of deadline-related content coming up for both the Canucks and the league as a whole. So it's always an exciting. time when we approach trade season. Awesome, buddy. We'll keep up the great work. We're going to have you on again shortly, I'm sure. Thank you to our listeners for listening to us. My only plugs are join the Discord server. The invite link is in the show notes. We're going to be doing a bunch of mailbags in the upcoming

week or two with games slowing down for all-star break. So get your questions in and you can do so by joining that. And check out the YouTube channel as well. Actually speaking of Travis Keneckney, if you're a Canucks fan listening to this and all of a sudden you perked up and got interested. I just did a big episode on him with Daryl. which you can listen to. It's a full deep dive of him and everything that he's been doing this season. And yeah, that's going to be it. I hope everyone is a great weekend.

And we'll be back Monday with plenty more of the Hockey PDO cast, as always streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network.