The Hockey PDOcast - The Canucks deal Horvat to the Islanders

Episode Date: January 31, 2023

Harman Dayal joins Dimitri in studio to discuss the blockbuster Horvat trade between the Canucks and Islanders. Who wins this trade? What does this deal signal to both fanbases? They break it all down. This podcast is produced by Dominic Sramaty.  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. 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.

dressing to the mean since 2015. It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filippovin. Welcome to the Hockey-Ocast. My name is Dmitra Filipovich, and joining me in studio is my good buddy Harmon-Dile Harm. We've got you on a Bo Horvatt retainer. So when there's news like yesterday's trade, I throw up the bat signal, you come in and we talk about it. That's just how this works. Good to have you back, man.

Yeah, it's crazy how often the Knox have been front-page headline material-worthy around the NHO. seen anything like it. We're talking about a span of just over half a season and how many times have the Canucks been the number one story around the league. And yeah, I mean, training Bo Horvatt, that's, uh, that's, that's, that's going to cause, uh, shockwaves. Yeah. Well, I guess it's selfishly, it's, uh, it's a good year to start a daily hockey radio show in Vancouver. Yeah. It's, uh, it's worked out well for me from a content perspective. So I'm personally relieved as well, um, that this trade came through when it did. It don't, you know, last time we spoke before the weekend, it seemed like an inevitability. I think there was like

general belief around the league, though, that we just wouldn't see any deals, especially of any magnitude, until the deadline itself, because of the cap dynamics with everyone so tied up against it, everyone trying to bank space and facilitate some of these deals. And so everyone was like, all right, this is going to be a pretty boring February here until we get to March, and then the flood gates open. And so at least now we have like a pretty tasty trade to sink our teeth into and discuss and get it out of the way now. And then hopefully, still will trickle down over the next four or five weeks here as well. So we're going to do, we're going to spend today's show just fully breaking down this trade,

unpacking it from every single angle we can think of. It's going to be fun. Hopefully people will enjoy it. Hopefully we'll provide some kind of like food for thought that people haven't considered. Because obviously when a trade of this magnitude happens, everyone's doing their trade grades, trade breakdown. It's like, oh, think about this, that, whatever. We'll hopefully provide some new kind of unique stuff that people haven't thought about so far.

So let's start from the perspective of board. Horvat, the player, and the contributor, because I think that's probably the most interesting or most pertinent as like an immediate, you know, actionable, consequential piece of information, right? Like Boho Rat, what are you getting from him? What's he going to be the rest of the way? And there's been a lot of talk about his shooting percentage, of course, right? Like he's shooting, what, nearly 22% so far the season. He's already scored 31 goals, which matches his career high that he set last year in 70 games. And so everything he does from here on out is going to set a new personal best for him.

And when you combine the fact that he's never really had this type of offensive production before with a very conveniently timed contract year, which he's in, for a player who's turning 28 soon and is shooting 22% as I said, I think like understandably people's sort of like eyebrows get raised in terms of red flag potential and people getting carried away about what type of player or that really is. So I think there's a really interesting discussion to be had there, specifically about what the expectations are for moving forward. Because I think there is some important context that seems to be missed in a lot of the

evaluations of Bo Horvat. It's purely like he's shooting 22%. This is not going to continue. And I don't think anyone is suggesting that he is a 22% shooter moving forward. But let's get into the player itself, what you've seen from him so far this year, maybe changes he's made to his game and sort of what our expectation should be for the next handful of years from Bo Horvatt. Yeah.

So right off the bat with Horvatt, he finds so many looks. from high quality areas of the ice, whether it's tips, rebounds, net front. Like, he's really mastered that sort of inner slot area, both in terms of winning, being able to sort of win pucks there because of his frame, but also just generally his anticipation and being able to find the soft spot. So, like, he's very, he's not a guy who's just firing shots off the wing.

Right. And he's getting lucky that a lot of them are going in. He consistently generates high danger chances. And if you go back to his track record before, he's always been a guy that's been among the individual expected goal leaders around the league, which again tells you his ability to find and generate chances from the most dangerous parts of the ice. So of course, 22% or whatever it is right now is inflated. It's going to come back down to earth.

But he naturally profiles to me as a sort of player who can sustain a higher than league average shooting percentage over sort of moving forward and especially as we've seen him evolve and really improve in a lot of those areas our good pal Thomas Drance did a great breakdown about a month ago detailing the work they did with Adam Oates and making a lot of changes so there has been legitimate improvement that's led to this breakout it isn't just oh look at this 22% shooter he's never going to be this again of course I don't think anybody's expecting Bo to be a 50 plus goal score moving forward, but I kind of view him as the sort of player who can be like a true talent 35 goal guy who obviously there's going to be fluctuation, right?

So that's generally how I view him. And the example that kind of comes to mind for me and it's not that they're stylistically the same players, but you look at the type of outburst that Chris Crider had last year, where Crider was consistently scoring around the 30 goal per 82 game sort of pace. to Bo. And then last season, he broke out with 52 goals. This year he's right around the mid-30 range in terms of what he's going to produce that goals-wise.

That's kind of what I'd expect from Horvett moving forward. And in terms of his goal scoring, he's, a big part of his production is going to be, the Islanders have one of the worst power plays in the league. In Vancouver, they, despite having a lot of shortcomings had a really good power play, Horvatt makes a lot of his hay from the bumper spot there. So you're going to need to make sure that you have. have a playmaker on the left on the left half wall that can consistently set him up and that he's not the only threat there because one of the benefits was elias peterson on the right flank he was essentially

like a decoy where penalty killers were sort of drifting off to his side which left more open ice in the middle for horvatt and that's obviously how you know a big a big chunk of his production has come as well the crider comp like statistically is eerie like if you look at the three seasons for each guy prior to their like going nuclear from a goal scoring perspective. They literally each scored 72 goals in like 192 to 195 games and shot like 14 or 15 percent. So that was like their baseline of like what they were clicking at for three straight years. And then Crider scores 52. As you mentioned, he shoots 20 percent. He's debt back down to a 36 goal pace this year, which is an elevation from where he was previously, right? It signals like something changed

the league, the environment around him, of course, everyone's scoring more in the league. So I think take that into account for Horvatt similarly like he's going up to this pace now I'd expect 35 to 40 in terms of his true talent level moving forward you know what's interesting is you mentioned drance's piece on on Adam Oates I think Horvatt himself deserves a lot of credit for creating his own luck here right like in this in one sense it is contract you're fueled but I think it's because he realized that he was at a very important point of his career yeah and he was like how can I maximize my earning power and get better at this stage of my you know prime where I really can make a difference moving forward and he changes the curve of his stick right he goes he stops shooting

wrist shots as much and goes to more of like a snapshot type of release starts working with oh it's all of a sudden gets to these areas and really maximizes like his goal scoring output from these specific regions and so I think that's an important piece of context here I watched all 28 of his non-empty net goals so far this year, 12 were deflections or tip-ins. Yeah. Five were rebounds around the net. Six were sort of like odd man rush or breakaways for him. And then five were those bumper plays where he gets a one-timer generally from J.T. Miller and he just hammers at home, right?

I guess the question is we don't necessarily know how sustainable being a, the league's best sort of tipper and deflector from that area is, right? It seems like if you're good at it, you probably should do it year over year. He had three of those goals last year to the year before. So this is kind of a new thing for him. Now there are technical changes, which might suggest that this is just like a new sort of standard for him. But I don't know, is he going to be the next Joe Pavelski and keep scoring 15 to 20 tip goals every year? Or is this just kind of a one-off and he's going to get it back to five, six next year? And all of a sudden, his goal scoring will come down with it.

I think he's definitely above average in that area, just in general watching him. and being able to cover him on a day-to-day basis understanding how much work that he's put in and seeing him at the end of practice is really honing in on some of those skills. With that said, I'm not expecting him to necessarily be among the league leaders moving forward, which kind of follows with this theme of

he's probably, he's going to be better in a higher goal score than he's been previously in his career. That much you can tell, even last season, 31 goals and 70 games or whatever it was, and he got injured right at the end of the season when he was on an absolute tear, there's been a natural momentum building for him as a goal score. He seems to be getting better each and every year.

But, yeah, again, I think we'll see some level of regression there. Well, we should say he's four years younger than Crater, I believe, and also plays a more premium position. So I think those two are important factors in acknowledging his value. Okay, let's shift to the Islanders then and kind of tie in Horbat, the player into why they did this year. I think it's pretty obvious in terms of why they identified him as a player who fits in need, right?

I think seeing all the coverage of this trade, it's fascinating to me how few people have, I guess, been following the New York Islanders this season. Because every piece of content has been, well, you know, they desperately need a goal score because they're a very defensively stingy team and they struggle to score goals. And that just has not been the case this year, right?

Under Lane Lambert, after the coaching change, the only teams who give up more high danger chances than they do are the ducks, the coyotes, and the Canadians. the only goalies, according to Sport Logic, that have faced more inner slot shots than Aalya Sorokin have been John Gibson, Coralva Milka, and UC Soros. Like, they give up a lot defensively, and that's not by accident. They've identified that against most good teams, they're at a talent deficit offensively, so they're really playing a riskier brand hockey. They're trying to manufacture cheap goals where they can in the offensive zone. And I think that's a good strategy.

The Lund also was at one point, I don't know if it's still true, they had the most goals from defensemen, which, I mean, you were not expecting that. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. And I think all of that is fine. Like they have the guy who's playing as the best goal in the world right now. They're also up to 14th and 5-on-5 goal scoring.

So like put all that together. And the only real issue with this team has been the power play, which you mentioned. They're 31st. Only the Canadians score fewer goals per minute than they do. And that's a real problem. And so Horvatt, I think, provides a lot of power play utility for them, not only from a goal scoring perspective where he has 11 powerplay goals this year, but also, I think.

think ironically let me take you on a journey here in the in the in the in the face off circle I actually think he provides utility I know people listening to the PDA guests right now are like this guy seriously going to be talking about the value of faceoffs and I understand like raw face off numbers are wildly overrated blown out of proportion not nearly as important as you'd be led to believe situationally though especially on the power play to start a two minute power play it's very valuable no one is denying that right like it's the difference between getting set up right away off a clean draw and getting into your formation versus going back, regrouping, having to try to reenter.

If you're a less skilled team, you're probably not going to enter on the first try. You're going to keep having to go back and regroup. You waste a minute, all of a sudden your top unit is coming off, second unit is coming on and having to accomplish anything, right? Horvatt, amongst all centers have taken at least 50 draws on the power play this year is second in terms of win rate at 65.4%. I think only Jonathan Taves is ahead of him in that regard. And so from that perspective, I actually do think he's going to help.

this power play quite a bit because I think he's going to allow them to spend more time in the offensive zone trying to make stuff happen. Now, if it's going to lead to more goals, we'll see, as you mentioned, I think the weaponry around him is significantly different on the power play on the island compared to with the Canucks. But yeah, whether it's Barzal trying to get it to him in that bumper slot or him posting up in front of the net and trying to tip Noah Dobson point shots, like I think he's going to find a way to still create on the power play. And so you put all that together. And I do think he's, I think he's going to meaningfully address what looks like their biggest need as a team, I think.

For sure, especially because how long have the Islanders kind of been looking for that sort of next top offensive weapon, even despite the increase we've seen in their goal production so far, especially even considering the potential fit at 5 and 5. And it's going to be interesting to see with their center depth, who shifts is going to be Barzal, is it going to be Nelson, who's going to play with Horvap, what exactly is the fit at 5-on-5. I'm really interested to see because I really like the idea of Barzell and Horvat playing together. Because the one thing that Horvatt is not like a traditional center at is his puck transportation. Most centers like to come low and slow in the defensive end and help engineer breakouts.

But when you watch Horvatt play, he often, he often always, almost looks like a winger in that. He wants to be the first guy once his team has picked up the pocket in the defensive zone, fleeing up the ice, having someone feed him that pass to then create something off the rush, which given Vancouver's environment, didn't happen very often because they didn't have. Yeah, he wasn't receiving too many tape-to-tap stretch passes. He wasn't, unfortunately. But again, that's more Vancouver than it is, than it is Horvatt.

But you look at his zone exit numbers over the years, zone entry numbers are a little bit better, but Horvett's never really been this big puck transatl. supporter and if you're pointing out one deficiency in him as a player overall the common criticism has been that he's not a natural setup man yeah not really a distributor that's where barzel ticks both those boxes in terms of being one of the league's best

transition forwards an elite playmaker that's that's gonna be a really exciting fit to see yeah yeah he gives them like a a very important and much needed trigger man from high danger areas right like Andersley has scored a ton of goals in this league over the years for Islanders, but it's in much more of like cleaning up the mess around the net as opposed to like standing in the slot and being like a true one shot finisher, right? So I think that's going to help them quite a bit. I'm very

fascinated to see how all of that works out. It's ironic that I mentioned the face offs because one of my criticisms of Horbat over the years has been because of his proficiency at faceoffs, people who don't really follow him on a day-to-day basis just assume that he's like a two-way dynamo. He's very good defensively. And he's not like a live. ability, but it's clear that like a lot of his value is derived from his finishing ability and from his offensive production as opposed to winning draws and just being a beast like Patrice Berseran in his own zone. Like that's just not a guy you want killing penalty.

It's just mischaracterized. Like it's, it's just clear that that's not the player he is. He's going to be 28 years old. He's been in the league for a decade. I think it's time to remove the notion that's going to be the case. And going to the honors, I've seen people being like, well, like I'm sure this team's going to help his defensive metrics. Like, I don't think so because that's not what they've been this year.

that's fine. Like they're getting away with it because they have Ilya Sorokin. I think if he keep scoring goals for them and the way that he has shown to be able to so far, that's kind of all they want, right? So I'm really, I'm really fascinated about that. Is there any other elements of either Horvat or kind of this Islander's perspective that you think is worth touching on? Like, we can get into the sort of, um, I think there's an entirely different discussion to be had comparing does this trade make them better and whether they should have been the team doing this trade. Right?

This is like, we've had this conversation about the Canucks actually ironically. So many times where it's like, yeah, it's great that they extended Andre Guzmanco. He's a good player who helps them right now. Should they have been the ones doing it? Probably not. And I kind of feel the same way in this case with the Islanders.

For sure. With the aisles, I don't feel that they necessarily gave up this exorbitant amount that, oh my goodness, how could you give up that much, especially since a lot of national insiders seem to be speculating that an extension will probably get done at some point. It's where there are. at in their competitive cycle and whether they're really a contender and whether a team that's looking at a possible downward slope over the next year to could justify giving up a first

wrong pick like that plus their top prospects. So again, it's not that I think that they gave up a crazy amount of value, especially because they also offloaded Pavilion's cap hit, which I think they'd been wanting to move his contract for a while. but I definitely was not a fan of a team in their position necessarily being the ones to pull the trigger. Yeah, even if Horat improves and the question of is it enough is, I think, a fair one, right? Like even after the addition, I'd imagine most playoff probability models have them at like 20% chance to make the playoffs. They're competing with four other teams in the East for two wildcard spots and all those teams are good at various things.

And like it's, it's going to be an uphill climb for them, right? And then so you get into the question of, all right, not only is that for the rest of this year, but then are you now because of the acquisition cost, backing yourself into a corner where you're just, you're picking up the tab on another long-term extension for a player in their late 20s, early 30s. And I'm very curious to see how that plays out. I've seen some speculation that, all right, if the next four to five weeks go poorly for them, Horvac could be redirected to a third party and they could recoup most of,

if not all of what they paid to get him. I don't know. That doesn't seem like that's the motivation here, right? It seems like Lule Marello is trying to make his team better right now. It's like a last gap, last-ditch effort. And he really likes, like, Bohra, that's a very Lulamorello type of player. And so he's just going out and he's like, all right, I don't care about the future. Like, he acts quickly, he acts decisively and with no care for the future.

Like we've seen that over his tenure. I mean, he's probably in trouble if they missed the playoffs anyway. Right. So from his perspective, and most GMs, if you were not, if you were, if you were, I were in that position, let's be honest, we're probably looking at that and going, let's do this. Paul Horvett's a great player. He's the best, he's the most valuable trade deadline. Other than Tim Meyer, I think. I think Timel Meyer is a better player, but maybe just because of position, yeah. I mean, you or I, you or I might, might feel that way, but widely in terms of

perception. He's been tabbed number one, right? So either way, you're looking at him as a true difference maker and I think we would if we were in that position we'd probably make the trade even if it's not necessarily in the organization's best long-term interests yeah well and they're kind of facing this nightmare scenario now where I think we're going to see a lot of 2023 protections for like any first rounders traded the rest of the way just because of how good the top of the class is particular conurbido no one wants to be giving away that pick even if there's like a 1% chance of it happening but the issue for them is I think the most realistic outcome here is

they're a pretty good team they miss the playoffs just barely that pick winds up being in like the 8 to 10 range they wind up keeping it and then all of a sudden enter next year with this kind of uncertainty of this unprotected 2024 pick looming over them and I don't think there are any bet

to be better next year than they are this year right and so I think that's as we segue here to like why the Canucks did this trade and why we might like it from their perspective, I think betting against the islanders in terms of their ability to win games next year is a pretty shrewd bet from the Knecks perspective. Yeah, it's not as if they have a tenta cap flexibility

in the summer to make huge additions. Even right now, I was looking at Don Lusijian's model, obviously over at the athletic. And even for this year, his model has the islanders at about a 55% chance of last, somewhere between the 13th to the 16th overall pick. Right. We're in that window, just missing the playoffs.

And since the first round pick is only top 12 protected, that pick would then go to the Canucks, which if you can... I think that's a good scenario for the Islanders, though, in the grand scheme of things, right? Just like bite the bullet, get out of the way. It's not like that player would help them next year anyways. It doesn't depend on how you view this year's draft class

versus next year in terms of... Even if the Islanders are bad next year, there are so many teams that have been in this tank race. So you could think like, okay, would you rather have, let's say, 14th overall pick this year or maybe like a late top 10 pick next year in a potentially weaker draft class? There's at least that debate. I think either scenario is pretty good for the Canucks.

And that's the difference, right, is this first round pick is the high ceiling asset for the Canucks in this trade. This isn't like if you made a trade with Boston or whatever and you get a pick and you're like, you know this, this is going to be in the mid-20s or later. And there is a significant difference between a first-round pick that could be in the middle of that first round versus one that's going to be really, really late

in terms of you look at draft pick models and the expected value out of those selections. And yeah, I mean, there is that scenario, which is unlikely, but also not a pipe dream to where they bought them on a line. maybe finish bottom 12 and then they truly suck next year and the Canucks potentially strike gold in a way that we've seen a lot of clubs over the year when you think back to a lot of them seem to involve Otto whether it's been them getting a pick that turned into

Tim Stutzler from San Jose in the art or the bar or the baron trade or the baron trade um yeah well and that's why I think not having the right to a future unproductive pick kind of holds you hostage as an organization. I think it's like the most helpless position to find yourself in, especially if things are going south because like the one saving grace or silver lining that NHL teams have if the season's going poorly for them is all right, at least we're going to be rewarded with a relatively high pick and that's going to be like the thing we take away from this season. And so being like one of the worst teams and also not watching someone else make that selection for you must be like such a just demoralizing.

experience. And yeah, like, you never know what happens. I'm sure that when those teams made the trade, like when the senators made that the Matthew Shane trade and they gave away that unprotected pick, they were probably like, hey, we're pretty good right now. Like, like, this came off Eastern Conference model. Yeah, this can't really hurt us and then things happen, right? Things change in this league very quickly. I think we mentioned how important Elias Serochan's been to this team. Let's say he gets injured next season and misses two months or something. They're probably going to be pretty bad during that stretch, right? I think there's so much uncertainty, so much unknown that can happen in a new season that I'd almost, if I were them, prefer to give away this

year's pick and just get it over with and then deal with the rest because they've shown already. I mean, they gave away their first last year to acquire Romanov, right? Yeah. I don't think that pick was probably going to be traded regardless. I don't think it was, it was, like, we shouldn't have like penciled in. All right, this player is going to be an Islander's prospect. It was going to move one way or another. They clearly have no interest in building that way.

And so it's scary as an Islanders fan because I think it's pretty clear. regardless of like how optimistic you are that eventually the tab is going to come do for this type of team building. I guess you're trying to like prolong the inevitable. And they had so many bleak seasons for such an extended period of time there that, you know, those two Eastern Conference finals they made a couple years ago just having like Matt Barzal and like a competent team, I think, has been like such a net positive for that for their fan base that I think they're probably viewing it from that perspective. But yeah, it's, it's very risky. Yeah.

Yeah. Because can you imagine if they didn't have him locked up long term, season goes sideways, you owe potentially an unprotected first-home pick for next year, and you don't even know where Barzell lies and all this? So thank goodness they at least got that deal done earlier. Oh, man. All right. So we've done Horvatt.

We've done that hunters. We're going to pivot and talk about the Canucks perspective of this. And then I think we'll also, at the end, talk about kind of the league as a whole and the fallout from it. our teams pivot. So let's take our break here, squeeze it in while we can, before we get too deep in the conversation. And then when we come back, we'll do all that.

You're listening to the Hockey PEOCast on the SportsNet Radio Network. Everything Canucks, before and after the games. Canucks Central with Dan Riccio and Satyar Shah. Subscribe and download the show on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. All right, we're back here in the PDO cast on the Tows and studio with us. We're breaking down the Bull Horbat trade. So let's talk about the Canucks perspective here.

seen, I was actually a bit surprised to see people acting underwhelmed by the return on this trade. I'm curious for your take on how much of that do you think is just viewing it sort of through like the rose tinted glasses of like if you're a Canucks fan, you're probably like pretty emotionally attached to Bull Horbat, right? He's spent all nine of his NHL seasons playing for this team. He's the team's captain. A lot of fans, I'm sure I bought his jersey. There's been very few like memorable fun memories and moments throughout his tenure. I would say the 2020 bubble in obviously like horrible worldwide circumstances, but it was this like one little two to three week reprieve at the end of the summer

where the Canucks went on their only real extended run during Bo Horrod's Canucks tenure. And he was an absolute beast that postseason, right? He had 10 goals and 17 games. I think that goal he scored where he danced and Vince Dunn is like one of the most memorable Canucks goals that I can remember in a long time. And so it's clear there's like an emotional attachment involved. I wonder how much of that is dictating

some of the negative reaction to what they got back. It's interesting because I actually as time has gone sort of continued, people have had a little bit of time to decompress. I actually think at least from what I'm seeing most Canucks fans are looking at it as a pretty decent return.

Yeah. Do you think it's maybe from the outside of like people like neutral parties or third parties where they're like wow, that's all they got for Bull Warbat? Yeah. especially because I was looking at the history for rental forwards over the in recent history. They don't typically go for that much. I mean, you look at Claude Giroux, and a lot of these players maybe aren't as quite as valuable as Horvette because of positional differences or whatever. But Giroux got a 2024 first round pick, Owen Tippett as well.

Mark Stone went for second and a brand strong. Yeah, obviously Pajot was a bit of. of an outlier where he fetched a first and a second, but that also came with a six-year extension sign the same day. Plus, it's also just an outlier when I looked at these other ones. I mean, there was Kevin Hayes at the 2019 deadline

who was also brought in to kind of be second-line center by Winnipeg, had around 41 points in 52 games, clipping really well. And he went for just a first-round pick in Brennan Lemieux, as we know, he's a fourth-line grinder, a replacement level value players. So the closest comp was, was Matt Ducheshain, to me anyway, where similar sort of player, where he can play center.

In that year, I think Duchesne had like 27 goals and 58 points and 50 games. That deal was interesting because... That's when he went from Ottawa to Columbus, right? Ottawa to Columbus, yeah. And in that trade, there was... It was compared to the Horvatt return. It was lower floor but higher ceiling because the center's got a first round pick. They got Vitaly Abramov, who was B-level prospect.

and in a second first round picking it, but that was only conditional on Duchenne resigning in Columbus, which he didn't, right? So out of these trades, I think Corvatt has netted the highest total return out of rentals, rental forwards over the last few years. Now, again, there's a case to be made that he's the most valuable player there,

but you also saw Mark Stone in there. So I actually think overall that this was a pretty fair return for the Canucks. Well, and also there's like a lot of, posturing or optics when deals like this happen, right? And so the NHL, since that Dushan trade, got, like, eliminated the possibility of doing these conditional, like, picks in the trades where it's like, if the player signs, you also get this extra pick,

which I think teams were pretty comfortable doing because, especially if they knew they probably weren't going to sign the player, it's like, yeah, we'll give you this easy win to your fan base. It's like how in the NBA, where all these, like, pick swaps and trades, and then teams come out and they're like, we got eight first round picks, but in reality, you're probably, not pick swapping for like four or five of those years and it's not nearly as

as massive as it looks and the Canucks kind of did that here where they I hope slightly tongue in cheek or like we got three first round picks in this trade I am at I really hope that I really hope it was it was not um based on on any seriousness on their part but yeah so I think the I think the return is totally fair and I think for me and far be it from me to to praise the Canucks for for decision making and and moves that they've made over the past couple years, it's been few and far between where I've had the opportunity to do so. But I view this as a win for them because, if nothing else,

regardless of your mileage on Atu Ratu as a prospect or what that first round pick is going to turn out to be, they, like, avoided a landmine that was ahead of them in terms of going the route of taking a package built around younger players, whether it was a Brandon Carlo from Boston, it was just speculated, or even like somehow I saw, like, Michael Rasmussen floated. Or Glockingiemie.

It was nonsense. Yeah. It was like they should not be doing this. It makes no sense for them. And so the fact that they got a package built around two futures with reasonable upside, I'd say, right? Yeah. Is a win because if nothing else, it signals at least that they're acknowledging the reality of their current situation and the fact that they could be taking a longer term view here. Now, obviously, we'll see how the summer shakes out.

If they just turn around and just start doing other short-sighted moves, we can revisit that. But for now, I think. you can hold on to it as a sliver of hope that, all right, they're finally doing the right thing here. The Canucks were also, I think, in a bit of a tough spot because, yeah, the incredible year Horvett had sort of boosted his stock as a trade asset, but it also made him a lot more expensive as a piece to potentially resign. Where I'm sure a lot of teams went, we'd love to add Horvatt and be able to keep him beyond the season, but with the year that he's had, he's going to probably make over.

over $8 million on his next contract. And regardless of the legitimate improvement we've seen in this game, we're still looking at a player whose career high before this season, which he'll obviously break is 61 points. Right. So I'm sure a lot of teams looked at it and went, we can only really trade for this guy as a rental anyway, as opposed to we've seen other situations where a teams may be willing to give up more

because they feel like they're, they're going to trade for him and resign, which I'm sure the Islanders will explore, but I don't think there necessarily would have been a ton of teams that could be in that spot and justify extending him long term as well, which I think hurt Vancouver's negotiation. Negotiating position.

Yeah, we highlighted this when we talked about it on Friday, right? It was like, I'm sure the avalanche would love to add to a little bit more about right now. The Wilde. Be amazing on that team. The Wilde cannot afford to give him his next contract. So are they giving up premium assets to do so? Probably not. It doesn't make sense for them. The aves, I'm sure, would want to if they had them, but they just don't have the same treasure trust of futures because of the fact that they want to stand the cup last year and have made

previous moves. You said there, I'm sure the Islanders are going to explore it. Like, where are you at right now in terms of what the next step for Horvat here is with the Islanders? Like, do you think this came with, obviously, he said, like, they haven't talked out, talked about an extension or gone into that yet. He's going to leave that to his agent, Pat Morris. But I'm kind of curious for, I just can't imagine that the Islanders made this trade without feeling supremely confident that it was happening. Now, if I was an Islanders fan, I'd be uneasy about what the details of that are going to be, right? Like you mentioned over eight, I think pretty clear whether it's a seven or eight year deal, it'll probably be between eight to nine million per for a player who we like,

who's going to help this team, is going to be in his 30s for most of that. that contract. It's a pretty scary proposition. Yeah, that contract is not going to age well, regardless of how. Well, especially if you look at their current cap-friendly page, and it's a lot of money for a lot of players who are already in the 30s. Yeah, I'm with you. I can't imagine that the Isles made that trade without believing that they,

at least feeling confident that they'd be able to get something done. Yeah. I'm sure Lou just feels confident that he's going to get something done at all times, regardless of what it is or if it actually is based in reality. but yeah okay so let's stick with the Canucks here so we both like the I guess at least the direction of what yeah the package they got back is um let's break it down further then so they got that the top 12 protected pick for this year which transitions when unprotected one next year atu ratu who was the islanders top prospect I don't know where the athletic had their prospect pool relative to the Canucks I know that at

deepy ring side we had the Canucks at 28th I believe and the Islanders were maybe slightly ahead but not by much but he was for all intents of purposes the Islanders top prospect so I guess he becomes the Canucks like second best prospect now depending on their best like because I'm not including podcoles and and Hogg on there because they've already played enough NHO games right so it's I mean it's scraping the bottom of the barrel but he's also a very divisive prospect right I think the mileage on like what his upside is and how attainable that is varies. I've seen people worried enough about some of the skills that like they don't think he's actually a center long term.

So he's technically a center prospect now, but probably not. Of course, like had immense pedigree and then one of the weirdest falls from grace that I can remember during his draft year. I think the stocks trended back up. Yeah. Since then, right? So it's a highly intriguing prospect. And I think where I keep coming back to is these are the types of moves that Canucks need to be making because they need to take shots on high ceiling options, right?

Like I don't think getting some sort of a grinder or a third pairing meat and potatoes defensemen really moves a needle at all. Even if there's a small present chance at Atu Ratu becomes what he could be capable of, when you're at the position that Canucks are in, those are sort of the risks or calculated shots that you need to be taken. shaking. Yeah, it's interesting because I, you know, I'm not a prospect. No, neither of us are. That's why. I, yeah. I legitimately just turned to the NHL Scouts that I trust most, just surveyed, and across the board, all of them were pretty fond of Ratu's game. It is interesting that most of them viewed him as a, and of course, these definitions can change because this label was once put on a bull Horvatt, who obviously turned into much more than, uh, much more than, than what people thought he'd be,

but he's kind of viewed as a high floor, lower ceiling sort of guy. Where a lot of scouts I spoke to were saying that he's virtually a walk to at least sort of be a third-line contributor because he has so many projectable tools

with the size, with his overall athleticism, with his high work rate. There's enough there that even if he doesn't become this top offensive force, that he's going to be, an effective detail oriented checking sort of player which also has the heavy shot now the upside there right now at least

because again these things can always change still so young but the feeling seems to be that he'd probably top out as a second line player if he hits his ceiling the bigger question to me with Ratu which you sort of brought up was whether he can excel at center long term because I got a lot of the same feedback in terms of scouts wondering whether he's more of a winger long term.

I mean, one NHL director of amateur scouting for a team told me that he likes Ratu right now a lot better at wing because of number one, the skating, where he actually looks pretty quick once he's picked up steam. Yeah. But it doesn't maybe have an acceleration, a little bit slow to get there.

And the other sort of shortcoming that's been described as his hockey sense. the distribution aspect and whether he can truly drive a line from from the middle of the ice. So that's going to be really interesting to sort of follow. Now, the positive is that the islanders were developing him as a center. So even when he was called up, played at center, played center at Bridgeport, I believe, in the American League. So from the Connox's perspective, you're going to give him a long look at center. You're 100% given the team's need down the middle. You sort of need him to be.

He's going to have a lot of opportunities to fail before they move him. 100%. But it is going to be interesting to see whether that's where he ultimately fits positionally. Yeah. Well, that debate of like whether you can improve this skating enough to allow everything else to fall into place is so interesting. And it's ironic because that was like Bohore about the whole thing, right? It was like, all right, he's going to be reliable. Like he's going to be a good defensive player who like has a high floor.

But does he have the skating ability and skating chops to really kind of flourish offensively? And then it's funny how his career has, has wound. up unfolding. So yeah, I think there was a reason to be optimistic there for sure. Neither was our prospect. So we kind of rely on what we hear from others who put the more video work in for these players. But yeah, I think here's the thing. For the Canucks, there's no quick fix here. And we keep saying that, right? Like it's whether it's a prospect tool, whether it's the financial flexibility, whether it's how much draft capital they've mortgaged to have this sort of mediocre team for years now. The idea that adding any

sort of young player in this trade that would have been like a 24, 25 year old who's already ready to step in your lineup in day one, the whole question was, what is that accomplishing? Because you're not getting a type of caliber of player who's going to legitimately move the needle from day one. And this team is nowhere near good enough for like any other sort of player to really make a meaningful difference. And so pushing the ball down the road and giving more developmental years and chances for players to hit whatever ceiling they have is I think the right way to go up all this.

And so that's why that's why I keep coming back. I like this trade for them. I really think, you know, we heard teams, we've heard teams trickle out. I'm very curious if we hear any actual offers that might have been out there. There's been some frustration from other NHL teams, kind of sour grapes that they felt like they didn't have a fair shake in at least presenting their best offer for Boehruhebite services. One thing I also want to say because I saw that Kevin Weeks report that the Klessston and shop the Islanders's offer around.

Well, I'm actually, spoiler. I'm kind of working on a story in general, but the art of how deals sort of get done in the NHL. So I've had a chance to talk. Does it usually start with like an email saying, you up? Unfortunately not. No, okay.

But some of the stories are pretty funny. But anyway, like, so I saw that and I was like, one of the piece of feedback that I got from executives was a lot of times when there's an offer made, there's, like, it's well known. if you give a team a chance in a long time to sort of dwell on an offer, they're going to shop it around, that a lot of times when a buying team is making an offer,

they'll sometimes be like, you've got X amount of time to say yes or no. And if we hear that you've shot this at all, we're taking it off the table. So it sort of, you know, I don't think. It's like a take it or leave it type of deal. Exactly. So it ends up, I'm sure a lot of people look at that report and think,

oh, stupid Kanax, they didn't even shop that offer around. They just accepted it right away. I'm sure it wasn't that simple because any team in that situation, if they had the opportunity, would obviously try and chop it around. Yeah. Yeah. And I don't, I genuinely like, you know, let's give them benefit of doubt here. I don't believe that there was another offer out there that would have been as futures heavy

that would have provided as much upside or at least intrigue as this one. Like I, I'm all for bashing them, right? And I'm all for like being like, oh, they didn't do their due diligence or oh, they messed this one up. Classic. But I really think in this case, like, this. was probably the best there. And again, now you can make the argument that if they had waited closer to the deadline, maybe something either opens up or someone gets desperate enough to opt their offer.

You could certainly make that case. Like, there's still four weeks ahead. But you could similarly turn around and be like, well, you're playing a dangerous game with Bull Horvat out there playing 20 plus minutes in these games. What if he comes down with an injury? And all of a sudden, you're just stuck with him. Like, that would be a nightmare scenario. So I'm all for it.

And then, of course, you incorporate the human element of by all accounts. Like I think Bo probably wanted resolution here. I wanted this done do right by him. So I'm all for like doing it in terms of the timing. And I find it hard to believe that there was something better out there that they kind of missed out on. Yeah, I'm, I'm going to be interested to see because I think we'll see. I think we'll see some stuff trickle out. I think, I think there are teams that felt that they had a better offer.

But that's obviously their perception of it. And they're probably sour that they didn't get Horvatt. So it's a biased perspective. So I'm not going to sit here. I think a lot of those offers probably would. have included taking on more bad money. And so it's also interesting how Bovillier has been sort of framed as part of this deal, right? Yeah. I view it. It was, I mean, I'm not sure. I'm sure, like, you know, they're saying all the right things in terms of liking the player.

He's been a productive NHL in the past. He's still what? He turns 26 this summer. So, like, it's not a loss cause by any means. And I think a lot of his plummeting stock has been the fact that his shooting percentages has gone in the toilet the past couple years as well. And so I actually think it's a pretty reasonable bet from the Canucks perspective to be like, all right, this guy has one year left on his deal. He's expiring next year. He's 26. If we put him in a top six role, especially in Pedersen minutes, hopefully. Yeah. Score some goals, put some points up on the board.

Maybe we can get another asset from him between now and next year's trade deadline, retain some money. I think that's certainly in play here. But he's also like, I think it's completely found money from that perspective. Like I don't view this as like, Bobillier is going to be on this team for the next however many years. This is, I think, purely like a reclamation project, which is one they should be taking. Yeah, it's interesting because I've wrestled with this one and tried to figure out how I feel about Bobillier in this deal. Just because I would feel so much better about this if they had first, say, been able to find a way to, you know, either either the cat. On Kuzmanko and got a nice return for him and then Bovillier, you're looking at him.

And then just put him in those minutes. Put him in those minutes. Or, you know, they've previously found a destination for like a Garland or a Besser. Because now I look at it and it's interesting because if you're on team rebuild and you're like, I don't care what this team looks like next season. I don't care if they're competitive, which is the outlook you should have if you're the Knox. Then you don't mind Bovillier in this deal at all. if you're of the mindset, which the Canucks actually may be in, that they need to turn this

around and be competitive next season, then the opportunity cost of that cap space looms large because it's more money committed to wingers. And you're looking at a scenario where, like I was crunching the math yesterday, they've got around 6.3 million in cap space. Now, again, there are factors, other trades, buyouts, whatever, that's going to happen. The actual number will be higher. that amount you've got to replace Horvatt and then probably

your three top four defensemen short which is to say you don't really have any flexibility to meaningfully improve this team for next season barring unforeseen creativity that we haven't seen from this organization before outside of maybe the Travis Hammondick trade so it's interesting from that dynamic where I'm like I don't I don't hate

Bavillia's inclusion in this deal because again, I'm taking the longer view. And I agree in the sense that you can hopefully resurrect his value, maybe get a chip for him. But then there's the other side of it where I wonder what management's play here is where if they want to push to be competitive next season and this quick turnaround, then they would have been much better off with that for $1 million in cap space being able to invest it in a center or a defenseman or use it some other way. Yeah, I'm choosing to view it through the lens of it's good that they're taking on that 4. whatever million because it prevents them from spending it on someone in an ill-advised manner in free agency. That's actually true. It almost like it's like the money ball thing where you just take away a player from a coach so that they can't play them.

This is like taking away the money from management so it's like, you can't spend this. You know what? We've allocated this for. I thought you were going to say, though, that I had someone messaging and be like, it would be very connox if over the next calendar year they did sort of rehabilitate bobbolier stock and value and then we're like oh we actually kind of like him and then wind up wind up signing him to his next deal i was like that would be very conucks but i think ultimately they already have so much money invested in the wing that they really might like they might

spare themselves that pain i i i just you have to take the long-term view here i really do not see you mentioned like they need to show like unforeseen creation I think it would take like pure magic to have a competitive team based on how few resources are available and the talent already in place. Like it's just you have to take a long-term view and hear mine. And that's kind of guiding my optimism surrounding this trade. I think it pushes them further than that direction. I think if this is a precursor to like following moves elsewhere, that's alarming. But I will cross that bridge when the day comes.

I guess we'll take this win for for Connox fans. They need it. They need it. They need it. It's been a long road. All right. Is there anything else on this trade or do you want to wrap up here? I'm trying to think. I mean, the market here is interesting, right? Because it takes a center off the board.

I really don't think this impacts the Meyer market much. I think that sort of remains already what it was. If you look at the remaining centers, it's like O'Reilly, Taves, Henrique, potentially, although he's more of a winger and then, like, Nick Bukstad. Like, it's – Is Barbersheb in play? Barbersheps in play, but he's also, I think, believe – More a winger.

He's kind of like Henrique. Like he's been playing wing. So yeah, I mean, it's a pretty limited market, which is good. If you have one of those guys, you can probably leverage it into more now than you could yesterday. But other than that, I think we've done a pretty good job here of outlining all the key considerations. All right. Promote some stuff. Yeah.

Because you were up till some ungodly hours writing last night. Yeah, I was up until 2.30 writing a full breakdown, five thoughts on kind of the package. Canucks got and really diving into the weeds of a lot of this. So that went up and going to be pumping out a lot more ahead of the deadline because, boy, I don't think the Connucks are done there. Good, good. I hope so too. This was fun, man.

I'm glad you answered the bad signal and came in. This was the first of hopefully many of these types of trade breakdown shows. And who knows if the Canucks remain feisty, maybe you and I can do some more of those. Haram, thanks for coming in. Thank you to the listeners for checking out the PDO cast. We're going to be back tomorrow with more. So until then, thank you for listening to the HockeyPedio cast streaming on the Sportsnet Radio Network.