The Hockey PDOcast - The Monahan Trade, Kings Coaching Change, and Buying Canucks

Episode Date: February 2, 2024

DImitri Filipovic is joined by Thomas Drance to discuss Sean Monahan going to the Jets, the Kings making a coaching change, and the Canucks being a buyer this season.  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 Filippovich and joining me in studio on this lovely Friday to close out the week in style. It's my good buddy, Thomas Drands. Tom, Tom, second appearance for you on the PDO cast this week. It's a busy week, man. It's been a good week. Yeah, it's been a great week, actually. So here's a little peek behind the curtain.

I was initially planning on coasting smoothly into the All-Star break, doing a little fantasy show to help people with their fantasy lineups and everything and all that good stuff. And then we had a bunch of news on this Friday morning that were big league-wide stories. And it's not even All-Star stuff. It's not, the Olympics thing is obviously a big deal and the best on best and all that. But we're going to focus on more pressing NHL topics. Yeah. Sean Monahan trade.

We're going to touch a little bit on the Las Land Home trade now that we've had 48 hours of sort of marinade on it. And we're going to talk about the Kings making the coaching change as well. Let's start with the Monaghan stuff because I've got a lot of thoughts. on it. Some might argue 32 or more thoughts on it. I'm not sure. We'll see how many we can get through. But I've got a lot of... I have so many thoughts on this. We're going to get sued. Fair. Oh, you know what's so good. Last time, you and I made a whole bit about how we limited ourselves to talking about like five teams instead of all the East teams we wanted to cover because

we're known for going too long on stuff. We're a little long winded. And then in the Discord server for the Pediocast, people started making jokes about how like, oh, I can't wait for the trade deadline show when you guys talk about two trades. And so, you know what? They're not wrong. No. But let's see how much we get through here. Luckily, we actually can just talk about two trades and a coaching change today.

There we go. That's perfect. That's actually well suited for us. Yes, this is a good formatting. All right, let's start with the Jets. Because they are holding on a first in the central right now by point percentage. It figures to be an absolute slug fest between them, the abs, and the stars in the final 30 games for that number one seed. All of them are on pace for over 110 points right now.

And I think the need for them to add a viable top six center with like legitimate playmaking chops was always he always going to be a pressing issue even at full health. But I think the fact that we saw a couple games of them having to go at it without Mark Shifley available really expedited that and kind of cast this like nasty spotlight on it. Right. Because in the final two games before the break, they were running this. I mean, they've been running the Lowry, Needer Rider, Appleton line. Yeah, full season. But that became like their go-to five-on-five line where they were playing. host out of anyone. Yeah.

And then they were running Vlad and Mestikov between Eilers and Connor. They were... Coupari. My guy, Kupari. I mean, there was some Dominic Toninato there centering Valardi and Perfetti. It really kind of showed you that this is a big deal. Now, the Linholm trade earlier this week, I think, they were a team that was going to be in on it, certainly, and that he got off the board.

It really limited, I think, or shrunk down the market for players who fit this bill, especially in terms of rentals, right? We can get into like that middle stat, Boone Jenner, Scott Lawton, even Trevor Zegress, if you want to throw them in there, like tier of centers who are theoretically available for the right price, but all those guys are under team control beyond this season. Although that's usually a plus for Winnipeg. No, it certainly is, but I'm just saying like if you had talked yourself into this type of center, right? Like kind of top six center with legitimate offensive ability, it's a pretty small list. Right. And so with Little Home off the board, it pretty much shrunk down to Henrique and Monaghan.

And so I think that kind of expedited this process. I'm kind of curious for your take on this and just sort of the grand scheme of everything involved. Can I start by asking you a question? Yeah, of course. Should the Jets have been willing to get outbid? Yeah. You think so? Yeah, because I think both you and I are, as we talk our way through this, I think the takeaway is going to be we don't love, especially the price they paid.

That's what I'm saying. But should they have allowed themselves to get outbid on Lindholm and fall back to this? To me, given that they paid what? 60%, 70% of the price that the Canucks paid for Lindholm. I mean, it depends on your mileage on the defense prospect that Canucks gave up, but also you have to factor in that they did not take money back. That's what I'm saying. So it's like, you know.

It might be even more than 60 or 70% honestly. Yeah, it might be. I mean, the biggest trade chip that Vancouver gave up was the first. There's a conditional pick involved. in bowl. The Canucks give up two extra prospects, but, you know, one of them is a project, right? And the other is a really good prospect, but they also get $5.5 million a cap space. So it's like, yes, Bruce Stevech makes the Canucks package more valuable, but the five and a half million in flexibility is also value netted by Vancouver in this deal. Lindholm's just a lot better fit for Winnipeg especially, right? For the way

that Winnipeg plays especially, I feel like the Lindholm fit would have been well worth the cost of outbidding Vancouver, which granted was probably at least Brad Lambert or something, right? I mean, not insignificant. But yeah, I mean, this feels like a responsive trade. You know, it feels like the market got set. They didn't want to run out of options. They fell back. And I just worry about.

like a player in Monaghan who I think at his peak before the injuries was this really interesting sort of down low score. You know, he he consistently shot this highly efficient rate and it was because he was the best garbage man in the league, right? Just like from in tight, off of rebounds, net front stuff, he was sick. He hasn't really gotten back to that level, although he's been productive in 60-ish games in Montreal. does he take too much speed off the table for the Jets? Like, can you play him with Perfetti? Does that put too much stress on Nikola Euler's to do most of the heavy lifting through the neutral zone?

Those are my concerns. I just don't love the fit. Well, his, that's, I had some notes on that on his, like, second half of his career, I guess, transformation, right? Post injuries, this version he's become, because you're right, when he came into the league as a teenager, he was one of the best bets in the league, I think, to be, like, 30-ish goals. and shooting around like 15% on an efficient rate

for years on end he was that player I thought he was going to be like the next Ron Francis without the passing Well it's interesting because now so much of his value used to be tied up in that And then now he's sort of become this player Where if you look at a lot of the micro stats And all the tracking has been done by Cory Schneider

He essentially doesn't do much And the only categories he's like 60th percentile or better Are in zone shot assist primary shot assists, high danger passes, and primary assist. Yeah. Like he's transformed himself into actually being more of a playmaker. And I think that's not, I think that's going to be useful for this jet team because they certainly have shooting talent, right, regardless of how they use them, particularly on the

power play, right? I think a lot's been made of the fact that Monaghan has 13 goals, 35 points, but most of it, like I think over half of it has come on the power play. And that's been used as a negative in terms of weighing that production. But in this case, that's actually been a weakness for the Jets. Right. I think they're 24th in the league in power play. efficiency. And so adding a guy who can actually make some plays and maybe set up some more

dangerous looks is actually a feature for them in this case. The issue for me is we're going to get into the 5-1-5 stuff, but we haven't really actually seen them because of a variety of injuries get to use their best players on the power play. Right. Right. Like we've seen 20 minutes this season in total of Valardi, Shifley, Connor, and Morrissey, who are like their four best offensive players. And I'd love Nikla Euler's to be the fifth guy there. But even if he's not, we just haven't seen those four. And when they have at the start of the year, they were really good. And so the power play has been a massive negative this season, but we also haven't seen the real version of what it could be. So I don't want to be like, we should just put all our eggs in fixing that when it

might not actually be your biggest pressing issue. You're worried they paid retail price to solve what might be a phantom problem. Yeah. I think that's completely reasonable. I'm curious like before he got hurt last year the 25 games he played for Montreal I did really like his fit with Josh Anderson Now Anderson

I think has performed poorly this year And those two as a duo haven't been nearly as effective as they were when it was like the good vibes Canadians to open sort of the St. Louis era in the fall of last year but, you know, like I have seen some games where he plays an area game with like Tanner Pearson and, you know, compliments Brendan Gallagher, who's not exactly the neutral zone driver that he used to be,

ably. So I do think there's, at least there's some possibility that he could, like I can see in my mind's eye, him and Colpherfetti, for example, being like a good compliment in terms of being like, battle winners who are both smart, you know, almost like that very poor man's version of O'Reilly Perron. Right. You know, I could see them being sort of interesting compliments within the context of like, once they're over the blue line, you might see them be able to sustain some heavy shifts

and even create some interesting looks out of that. I just, yeah. Well, and I know they've been much better off the rush as a team and more than the ice, But, like, part of what makes this Jets team so, like, what makes a tick, I think, is that kind of cutting the ice down and dominating down low with, like, the size of a lot of their players. I think he'll help there. And all that. So certainly, I think he'll fit into that. I think it's interesting because part of this resurgence by them the season and why I think they've actually been really good beyond, like, getting great goaltending and the defensive numbers is they've totally transformed the way they play in terms of, like, they're getting so much more support in particular from their way.

wingers doing a heavy lifting kind of like Florida does and then that's allowed their defensemen to be more aggressive right and so all of that's kind of come into play and now so if you throw Monaghan into this as long as he's supported by the right foot speed of wingers I think it actually could work in the grand scheme of things like I don't think he'll take that much off the table there especially if he is like you're saying with Eilers because like Eilers is made to do that heavy lifting in terms of puck transportation and just get it into the offensive zone and then let Monaghan kind of arranged the chess pieces after that. Right.

So I think that like, I think that certainly makes sense. I guess my issue just here is, is the price. And I was a bit surprised, maybe I shouldn't have been to see Winnipeg give up that first, right? Because we've talked about in the past when they've been in this position, they traded a first for Paul Stasney. They traded a first for Kevin Hayes. But they've also been an organization that I think for obvious reasons of values,

cost controlled, like team controlled young players. And I think that's probably why. And they've also done really well for the, like, I know like the Logan Stanley pick and there's a few misses there, best align in and so on and so forth. But like, they generally drafted pretty well, especially in the middle to back half of the first. And so it's strange to see them, I guess, give up that pick for this caliber of player. But maybe that just speaks to that sort of desperation or response that you mentioned out the top. Yeah, I also think the fact that they've made so many picks. I mean, this isn't a team that's been contending the last few years, right? So

it's not like they came out. I wonder if from Winnipeg's perspective, especially thinking that this team might be a little bit ahead of schedule if like keeping your barlow McGrote Lambert's uh solomonson class guy yeah was valued more highly by them than the draft picks and and that's the other thing that I think we're going to see as this deadline approaches you know teams are going to try to hold on to prospects I think the industry is somewhat low and in my opinion and actually lower than they should be on what the late first round looks like this class. Yep. There's more excitement about next year.

I'm told that, you know, a lot of seller teams are like really trying to push to get those 20, 25 firsts. And obviously, teams don't love to leave their costs unfixed. Yeah. Take that big swing risk should things go sideways on them next season. So I think they're going to be hard pressed to do that, but that's something we're going to see. And teams are also valuing prospects. almost as highly, if not more highly than draft picks or than late firsts this year. And that's sort of a bit of a reversal, certainly a reversal from the market 12 months ago.

And just some trends to monitor and some trends that might ultimately have shaped what we saw here, where Winnipeg perhaps was far happier to give up their late firsts and really prioritized holding onto their prospects. Well, like contenders with players already making a bunch of money at the top of their lineup should be treating it that way, because those players they've already drafted and developed are much more likely to be fast-tracked towards, like, being valuable ELC contributors for them within the next couple years as opposed to a guy who you still haven't even picked. It's such an unknown in that regard. You know, good for Monaghan. I want to frame it through that because, like, he's going to be 30 in the fall.

And his body has been through a lot the past couple years. And so the fact that he's actually been able to play every single game this season and produced at a level he has is, like, is a cool story. Right. I also think, though, because I've seen people say, well, why with the market being so small for this type of player, why wouldn't the Canadians wait till closer to March 8th to sort of build up desperation and kind of drum up a bidding war between New York, Boston, whatever teams are interested? It's a good plan on paper. But we just saw it last year, right? Like, first couple months, it was like, Monaghan, I think they might be able to get a first round pick for him or a good prospect because he's playing well. And then he gets hurt, doesn't play after December 5th.

or whatever, and for a player with this track record and this match mileage and various injuries he's accumulated, I think for like whatever marginal gain they could have gotten in terms of waiting for that return was not worth inheriting the risk of that gain of that return being a zero if he gets hurt again. This is a slam dunk return. Yeah. Like this is a really, you know, like if we were going to do a winners and losers of this trade thing, like one of the winners, I think, would be the Anaheim Ducks because you're sitting

on Adam Henrique. And surely Henrique's going to be able to get more than this. Like, this is now your floor for Adam Henrique. And if you had told me two weeks ago that Adam Henrique was going to get a first and another pick, I would have said, you know, good for, good for Hanheim. Good for Verbeek. Yeah, I would have as well. I think that that the market angle of this is so fascinating, right? Because all it takes is well-placed intel to get a, get the ball rolling a little bit.

And I think the fact that we're in All-Star break now and we see this at the draft. We see this at these events where GM meetings where like everyone gets together in one locale, it facilitates a lot of conversations and kind of expedites this process sometimes. So it might have happened anyways. But it was interesting like, what was it a week ago or two weeks ago? You got like Frank Sarajevelli tweeting about the market from on hand and the interest league wide and how like they're going to get back a first. And there was a lot of pushback to that. And all of a sudden you get this point where that's happening.

And I had someone in the Discord ask. I appreciated Sarvali's dunks today. Quote tweeting himself with the check the receipts was hard earned. I liked it. Well, someone in the Discord asked, do teams ever express interest in a player just to run up the price for a competitor? And my answer was, you'd like to think so. But I actually think no. Because a lot of the conversations I've had with people working for teams in various roles,

I think fans would be surprised to know, like, how preoccupied they are with their own operation, right? Like so much of the time and energy, unless you're like a pro scout who's exclusively just gathering intel on other teams and other players. If you're like someone who's working with a team, especially in a day to day basis, you almost have such tunnel vision for like, even like menial things that are happening within your team structure on a regular Tuesday that you're almost not, you're not. paying attention at all to what's happening around the league. Yeah. And so you'd like to think that like that 40 chess approach of like, let's get one of our competitors. If we're, if we're the avalanche, let's get the jets to pay more because we're battling for first in the central and maybe we'll like that. I just don't really think in practicality it actually works like that.

I also think in maintaining relationships, everyone's looking to like make fair deals and not mess with people. You know, like the problem with bidding on a package you're not actually interested. in is if you get the call back from your colleague and they're like, yes, we're in. Right. And you're like, ah, you know, like, oh, I wasn't expecting that. Yeah, like there's a real risk at auction, right, that you put your paddle up and win the painting you can't afford. And I, you know, I think when that happens in real life, it costs you money. But when it happens in this scenario, it costs you credibility with a colleague.

And that's something that can harm your options down the line. So, you know, I think there's a more cooperative flavor to trading. It's obviously competitive. It's a poker game. But there's a cooperative veneer on it that I think shouldn't be underrated and sort of face value offers and how rare it is to get ones that aren't. I mean, as someone who does fantasy football options every, every year, I know that sweat all too. Oh, you're trying to price and force. you're like, I don't even want this player or need them, but I can't let my competitor get him for this cheap.

And then you click that extra dollar. And then you're like, please keep going. Please keep going. Don't have me picking up the tab here. You mentioned the Jets kind of whether they would have been better off not getting involved with this. It's funny, the last time we spoke a couple days ago, we were doing our Eastern Conference, Bear Berber's bowlcase, and we talked about the Rangers. And I was like, I actually, there's a lot of smoke about Monaghan to New York. And I was like, I really don't like that fit because they, he's almost the opposite of what they need.

They need a lesser name. I don't care about their production. Just someone who can provide a lot of the things that he can't without what speed. And someone who does not need to touch the puck. Yeah. Because a lot of players on the Rangers need to touch the puck. Yeah. Like they need some, they need.

We were talking about this the other day off, off Mike. But the Rangers added Vitrano and Mott. Do you undersize guys who don't need the puck? who can skate fast and have some like one shot scoring ability to punish mistakes. And it was like, oh, they're in the Eastern Conference Final. They're punching so far above their weight. Yeah. And it's like they learn none of the lessons from that success.

Yeah. I really can't understand it. It's, that's what they need. They need Vatrano and Mott. And luckily for them, that's like not a difficult player type to get affordably. As long as you know that that's what you need. As long as you know that that's what you need and you're confident that you can find the next version of that.

Which you should be able to, you think. They're all over the place. Yeah. Quick note on the HABs here because I think we always talk about a T-Bob's tidy, tidy bits of business. And getting a future first to take the final year of his contract from Calgary 17 months ago, which was, I think, 6.375 million, but it was $6 million in real cash. And then he gets hurt, right? So they don't monetize it. But then they sign him to a 1.985 or whatever it was for one year and then get another first for him.

And another first for him. And another pay. I should say his AAV being that low, I think, is a big part of this for Winnipeg, because I think they still have like $3.3.3 million or something in deadline cast space. So I do think they'll add someone certainly. And I think they'll be in on TANF as well. They'll be in on various players. That would be a great fit for them.

But man. Sean Walker. The Havs getting two firsts out of this is unreal. And that first they got from Calgary. There's a lot of logistical hoops to jump through. but I believe like unless it falls in the 20 to 32 range, which it doesn't seem like it will because Calgary will almost certainly not make the playoffs this year.

I believe that pick gets deferred to being either Calgary or Florida's 2025 first. And so the haves are going to get the Jets 2024 here and then that pick in 2025 is pretty great. And this is how you do it. This is how you opt. If you're a bad team, this is how you weaponize your cap space and this is how you basically buy a free asset. Now, I don't think they really care for the rest of the season because it's going to be like an audition and there's opportunity for players to step in and earn roles on this team.

But because of the injuries they have with Devorak out, dock out, even U-Hook. Yep. They basically have Nick Suzuki and then I guess Jake Evans. And then it's like, who else wants to play center for us? We're going to hold auditions at the Bellsetter. Do you want to come play for us? So that'll be interesting to see in the final 30 plus games. But I mean, if you're going to get this offer, like it's a.

absolute no-brainer. I mean, here's a take for you. Should they do it again? Like, you buy another go by a distressed, yeah, of course. Go buy a distressed center of some kind whose value is low and

try to rehabilitate that value. You know, like, I, even someone like Roslavik, who's an RFA with arbitration rights, feels like, given that he's at a $4 million dollar salary, he's like 50, 50, I'd say less than that, 25, 75 to not even be qualified. to be an unrestrictive free agent, but he doesn't have to be.

Right. You know, if you have the space to eat that salary and, you know, the space in your lineup to potentially rehabilitate his, I mean, what's the gap between Monahan and Roslick? They're kind of the same guy except one's a little bigger and one's right-handed. Yeah. So, you know, that to me would be an interesting approach to see if the HABs double down on the on the on the value resuscitation project that has done such um that they've done so well with in uh monahan's case but it's remarkable what reputation or like your player profile can do

for your stock in this league right because you think of these guys and linholm henrique monahan i think they're all players who like are just universally liked by teams and so i think that helps a lot here whereas you're mentioning like you obviously threw rossovich out there but like whoever else it's not the same calculus right because like then if you're trying to spend that around rehabilitated and then trade it it just it's viewed through a different lens i guess yeah but it was viewed through a different lens with monahan when he was first acquired yeah that's true well whenever you can give up a first so that you can give nasmagadry $49 million you you have to do that so and to be clear i think we both really like the flames before the start up last season so yeah i mean i'm shocked

You know what, though? The flames just in general are a good reminder that you and I can talk about aging curves all we want, but that's math. Like in the real NHL, it's not an aging curve. It's an aging cliff. Right. You know, it's just hard to know. When you step off of it, it's over. Yeah.

Yeah. All right, let's go to any other notes on Monaghan or this deal? Like, we'll talk a little bit about Linholm kind of related to this. I did a big show on it yesterday, but I'm going to get your take on it. But maybe we can go to break and then we'll kind of do that at the end, depending on how much time we have. Yeah, I just want to see the fit. Yeah. And it's something that I need to see, I think, because, like, I'm really, I have both concerns and excitement about a perfetti Monaghan Eilers trio, for example.

Like, I can see it working, but I also can see it really putting too much stress on Eilers and holding one of the things that has made the Jets special this year back a bit. And so, like, well, it's, to me, to me, Dim, honestly, it just feels like a really volatile deal. It feels like one of those where we could be looking. back on it in the first round and honestly thinking, I know this isn't the best analysis, but honestly thinking, wow, Monaghan added an extra gear to their power play, he's found this great chemistry with Perfetti, or we could be there and Monaghan could get chased out of a matchup role and be like barely used, be a designated hitter by round one. It just feels like a huge swing, and maybe the Jets needed that, but I would have seen them swing in a different

direction. Especially with giving up a first round pick, even if you don't value it as much as some of the prospects you have. Like there's still a certain level of name brand value attached to that. And a floor. Like, okay, he might not be, he might not add a gear to our first line, but at the very least he's going to stabilize our third. This to me feels like a bet with no floor. And that's what concerns me about.

Well, I'm not sure about that. Like, I think, I mean, I think there's serious risk purely because he could very easily get hurt. I mean, that's true for a lot of players, but I feel like he has more inherent risk for that because of his history. I do think regardless of the concerns about the footspeed and the fit, they were asking players who simply do not possess the talent level to play in scoring roles with players who desperately need someone

who can at least think the game on that level. You just cannot use Vladim Mesnikov, and I like the player, but to center Nikola Eelers and Kyle Connor and expect that to work. Yeah, and Monaghan can at least think that way. You can't even Adam Lowry. I don't want him playing that role, right? Like you don't get me started about like putting Dominic Tonnenado in there. No.

So like I get it. Like he'll be able to fit in on that way. But it, I do think it is a bit of a risky move. So yeah, I think that's why we, uh, super volatile. The way we did. All right, let's take our break. And then when we come back, we will switch gears and talk about the Kings making a coaching change. You're listening to the HockeyPedio cast streaming on the Sportsnet Radio Network.

All right. We're back here on the hockey pdio cast closing out the week. our pal Thomas Drans, who I lured into the studio, threw up the bad signal once. Initially, the Monaghan News came out and I was like, all right, maybe I should do something about this. And then we got the King's coaching change shortly after. And I was like, Tom, get in here. We need to talk about this before you do your show. So we're going to talk about the Kings firing Todd McClellan, the timing of it, and what it all means.

Here's a fun stat for you. Rick Talkett is now the 20th longest tenured coach in the league. Dave Haxstall 8th. Yeah, it feels like the expansion draft was. yesterday. I know. It's two and a half years into the Crackens' existence. Unbelievable.

The eighth longest tenured. So since the holiday break, the Kings, I think it's been well documented, are on this three, eight, and six skid. Only Chicago and Minnesota have a worst point percentage in that time. In that period of time, what is kind of making it so much worse for them is the fact that the Oilers went 14 and O'O during this winning streak they're on, and the Canucks went 10, 2 and 2, and these are teams that they're going to be judged up against, right? And so we're at this point now where it's almost mind-blowing to actually wrap your head around it

where on November 25th, LA was 16 points up on Edmonton and both teams had played 19 games. Since then, they've played three fewer games in the Oilers. No, the Oilers have played three fewer games, sorry. And they've gained 19 points on them in that time. We always talk about how tough it is once you dig yourself a hole to make up ground because there's so many three-point games and it's just so impossible to meaningfully gain ground. and yet here we are in a short period of time those have done just that.

I think here's the issue because in that period of time the Kings are 31st in shooting percentage and I think it's going to be pointed to whenever there's a coaching change you look at that and you're like, hmm, and now a new coach is going to come in and it'll bounce back.

The same percentage has been lower, certainly. I don't think it's like bottom. I don't think it's 31st. What's your time frame? Since January last day, well, since the holiday break. So it's December 26th, the last time I've done,

whatever. Yeah, I mean, I think the, like, in the month of January, they were something like, you know, 906 at 5 on 5. It's like, you can't survive that. Well, you can't if you're scoring any goals. That's true. You can't survive that when you're shooting 6%. And I think that's the issue, right? Because you could make, you could paint this case depending on which side you stand on that they deserve better.

And I think they certainly do. Oh, yeah, at 5 on 5. 898, save percentage. 5.9. shooting. I mean, you can't survive that. There's no way. There's no way to survive that. Yeah. You know, and I mean,

their underlying stuff still looks good. And that's important. You know, fundamentally, I will not change my view of a team based on a 15 to 20 game sample of games where their underlying form is still elite and their results suck because their percentages go against them.

Serve me well earlier in the year when I was, you know, buying low on Euler stock. I'm confident that the LA Kings are fine. Yeah. I really am confident that the L.A.K. Confident that they're fine in terms of making the playoffs and giving whoever they play in round one a difficult six or seven game series or fine as in they're a good Stanley Cup futures bet because I think those are two pretty different.

I think they're a good Stanley Cup futures bet, especially at their depressed value. Right? Like right now, that's a dip I'd be interested in because I think a rebound's inevitable. And I think this team's absolutely there in the same class as Vancouver, Edmonton, and Vegas. Yeah. Now, Edmonton and Vegas for me are slightly different in that I think Edmonton might be the best team in hockey. Yeah. And I think Vegas also might be the best team in hockey, but they're not going to tell us whether or not they are until the playoffs.

And that's fine. Like, we just have to analyze them a bit differently. I don't think they're trying to throw their fastball, and that's completely understandable. But you see them turn it up against the Rangers at home or when they came through Vancouver in late November, and it's terrifying. It's like, oh, right, you're still the biggest golden eggs. But they're just not playing that way consistently, and I don't think that's, I don't think that's anything to worry about yet. But I think they're absolutely in the mix, sort of in a tier below those two anyway. And, you know, I think what happens sometimes is you reach a point where it might not be about your team's quality.

And I don't think it is in LA's case. But the breaks continue for so long that they become self-fulfilling. Of course. And well, you also, like, you can't view it in a vacuum in terms of like not every game is its own entity. Because if you've played 11 games in a certain way, like, you might change your habits to overcompensate. and then based on how it's going. And then it's almost like changing your like betting habits in a way where it's like, I'm due to do this one thing, but then you change it up.

And it's like, if you just stuck the course, you probably would have regressed. If you just kept hitting DeVincenzo 3's ladder, you'd be fine. Yes. The, there's like two people that got that reference. I know, but they really liked it. Yeah. The overall thrust of it, though, is, you know,

and I think we're seeing the opposite with Vancouver, where things go your way and then you actually materially start to play better. The confidence changes your posture, it actually changes your underlying performance. And I think when you're in one of those spirals sometimes, like we saw with Woodcroft,

who I think is a totally good coach, you need to rip the Band-Aid off just to give everyone like... At first start. Yeah, the sense of a page turned. Yep. That said, one of the hardest tricks to pull off in hockey,

as we know, is jumping from the good tier where the kings have been for a few years and getting to the great tier. Yep. And the kings tried to do that with a deal that I liked for Pierre-Luc Dubois cashing out players we all thought were good

to try and land a player that... Consolidating, yeah. ...was great. Yeah, to do the thing that... I mean, the avalanche tried to do it. Vegas is like the master's at it, right? Like, Schmitz cap hit goes out. Petrangelo.

comes in, right? Yes. We're not worried. Original upgrades, but because you can only use a certain number of players. Suzuki and draft picks for patch ready, no problem, right? A bunch of sick prospects for Mark Stone,

Alex Tuck for Jack Eichl, fine. You know, like, they've done it time and time again successfully. But it's a really hard trick to pull off. And in the King's case, I think it's fair to look at it through 50 games and say they might have got it wrong in terms of the player they picked

to prioritize over depth. And I'd add, at least the Valardi piece of the depth player they gave away. I thought Valardi was a product of system and playing with great. In terms of his stunning two-way play, you know, I bought the shot. Like I liked the player, but I didn't think he was like a top end defensive driver. Yeah. But he is.

He is. Like, I think he is. And I think the Kings ended up on the wrong side of that bet. Just as I did. Also dominant around the net, both in terms of scoring, but also making plays for others. His one-shot scoring is sick. Exactly what this King's team needs, right? He's almost essentially been pretty much entirely what they, I think, signed up for with Dubois thinking that's what he'd be for them.

And so that irony involved in that transaction is tough to swallow. They are kind of buttering their own bread a little bit. Like Dubois Fiala, I don't know why they went away from it, but it's not like he's had high-quality teammates. No, I mean, he's been playing with Laferrier, Jared Allen, Anderson Dolan, Carl Grunstrom, Arthur Calliyev. And I think if you want to paint an optimistic view, it sounds like Victor Arvinson will be back soon. Yeah, not a hope. He's 30 coming off of a second back surgery and he takes a ton of punishment as an undersized player. So it's a bit scary in that sense, but he's such a dynamic score and creator for them that I think that's certainly going to infuse them with that.

And maybe just throw a lifeline for PLD because you're right. Like 20 points in 48 games is not what you paid $8.5 million for and the acquisition cost. The underlying metrics are good. I think his on-ice shooting percentage is under 6% at 5-1-5, right? Like everyone is going to look bad in that scenario. And so I also think, though, he has not done himself any favors, certainly, right? Like, just the visual of how lethargic and, like, unhappy he looks at times, especially when they're down. And then, like, all the sniping post-game and stuff, like, none of that is going to do you any favors,

especially when you're going through this losing streak. And maybe that's snowballing thing. And especially with his history. of conducting normal business, but in the context of hockey. In the most dramatic way, though. No, but if he was an NFL running back or an NBA small forward,

no one would blink at like, I want to choose, but because no one ever does it in hockey except one guy, Matthew Kuchuk, who then also is... But if you're going to do that, you have to follow it up with the results. You do. Otherwise, people are going to make fun of you. And that's what's happening. And so I don't think that would happen in the NFL.

And the NBA too. Yeah. Okay. It's part of doing a business, right? Like, if you're going to call your shot and then follow through the way Matthew Kachuk did last year, then... Guess what? Then you're a hero.

Maybe not for Calgary friends, but like, I think you can appreciate how badass it is in a sense. Yep. Okay, you know what? You're right. I do think Dubois, I still, I'm still holding. I'm still holding my Dubois stock. Of course, of course. But so this team...

I think his playmaking will make them a tougher out in the playoffs. But there's no question the first 50 have been ugly. Here's what I want to point your attention. to. And I've been talking about this trend for a while now. And I think you and I specifically had a few conversations about it. And I think it only matters in terms of Stanley Cup contender, not, like, Dom has an 88% probability still to make the playoffs. They're clearly better than the Blues and the Predators and whatever. That game right before the All-Star break, where they just completely, like, they're in a different weight class than the Predators. No, they are. But like,

and that's not a concern for me right now, though I know, like, when you keep losing this many games and dropping down the standings, you start thinking about that. But I still have aspirations for them to be better than that, right? Oh, yeah. And so it's interesting because all the public models, evolving hockey, money puck, natural statric have them as a top five team offensively in terms of expected goals generated. Yeah, that I don't agree with. Sport logic has them 19th. Right. In expected goals offensively and 18th in slot shots. And this... That more closely matches my viewing experience. It does. And this is the delineation between being a good team and meaningfully contending for a Stanley Cup.

And they're like top three defensively still. So the bar you have to clear offensively is lower than it is for most teams. But that's not clearing it. You need to get to top 10. Yeah. Minimum. If you're going to be a Stanley Cup contender, you do. At least top 12.

Now, I do think though, like the upside case, the bull case for the Kings would be Dubois struggled so much and he's getting no favors from the quality of his teammate. Right. Between Arvinson's return. And if the Kings can add somebody, just a live body. Yep. Like a live body with top nine skill set at the deadline, you're going to see better from Dubois. And he's the guy, his struggles are the difference between them being like 12th in McClellan's system and 19th.

And personally, I'd buy that. Now I also think McClellan's system was pretty rigid. Mm-hmm. You know, I, let me ask your question. Jim Hiller, his replacement, the interim coach. should they have gone out and gotten a name here? Tom, you read my mind. They don't play until February 10th.

Yeah. Their first game back is against the Edmonton Oilers. Yikes. Can I interest you in a little Jay Woodcroft? Oh, man. You can, I'll buy all the Jay Woodcroft stock that you have available. Who knows better at least efficiencies as a team and what stopped them from getting to a second round?

Yeah. Then the guy who beat them. in the past two years. We all need this for the storylines. If they hired Woodcroft, I'm watching every single King's game. I mean, I probably will regardless because I'm afraid. And I guess we'd need Edmonton,

so we'd need Vancouver to slip enough that Edmonton won the Pacific. Right. And then we could see... Has a lot of our team, yeah. And then we could see an Edmonton, L.A. rematch with Woodcroft on the other side. That would be amazing.

Who doesn't want that? Yeah. Make it happen. No, I think McClon's a really good coach. I don't think he's going to be out for very long. I think there's a lot. a lot of teams that could benefit from him. But yeah, I think, I mean, what do you think about the senators for him?

I like that a lot. Like, I think that rigidity in terms of, like, actually bringing structure and, like, accountability to go from bad to good and maybe not worry about good to great right now. Is it important for them? I mean, it is. My concern there is, I mean, given the amount of high-end, prospects that the kings have brought through. Right.

There just, has there been enough growth under McClellan from the perspective of what you want to bring in next from a senator's perspective? That's true from most coaches, no? I think most, maybe that's, maybe that's an issue. And maybe that is a bigger conversation, but. I don't know that would, I'm just saying that I'm not, I don't even know if that's on McClellan. So it might be on their drafting.

It might be on any number of other things. It might be on the fact that they trade a lot of picks and prospects. But yeah, it's something that I would, it would give me. me pause in Staios issues. I mean, if they did that, you wouldn't even, from the King's perspective, you wouldn't even have to wait until round one because they play the Oilers three more times in the regular season. So you're basically getting a playoff series, half a player off series there. And they have four more games against the Canucks.

It makes sense, like, you don't want to panic, but also if you are ever going to make a move like this, this is the exact time to do so, certainly. I just, like, I just don't understand why they wouldn't have swung a little bigger. Well, I think they're, we'll see what they do, right? I know, but interim head coach for the rest of the season. Oh, it's for the rest of the season. Well, that's what the press release said today. Like they were really, it was pointing.

Right, right. Because I saw the Rob Blake, and this might become outdated by the time people listen, but I thought they're not like having a press conference until the fifth. Okay. Which strikes me as a bit strange. I know it's like the weekend and it's also a All Star weekend and all that. They don't play till the 10th, so it's not pressing. And it's also like, we're going to talk about this coaching changed three days from now. Yeah, okay.

So that's interesting. I mean, I think Rob Blake's a really bright guy. I think he's done a really good job. So we'll see, but I can't understand. And maybe the Kings honestly are looking at this thinking this isn't our team. Like this isn't the one that has a shot. But it's at some point, Doughty and Kopitar, you know, you've done such heavy lifting to create a team with a shot around them. It feels odd to me to sell this year short on the back of a 17 game stretch with 6% shooting and 890 goal tend.

like this this feels to me like a big name you know coaching swing whether whether it's woodcroft whether it's i don't know i don't think clothe julian's the solution but something like that you know okay do you want to talk a little bit about lynnholme and the canucks on the way out here i think it makes sense thematically yeah um i love the deal for the canals yes yeah i do think the bruce Stevich thing is interesting too because that's, you know, we talk about volatility. There's almost no more volatile asset than like super high scoring D plus one offensive defenseman. It's really hard to know whether you're going to get Ty Smith or Bokvist. Yeah, but or even Brant Clark in terms of the slow adjustment or whether or not the guy's

going to be a star. And so that's an interesting piece from my perspective for Calgary. Like at least they got a first plus an asset that at least has a shot that if it hits is like a game changer in terms of of their build. So I thought they did okay, but I just love the fit for Vancouver. It's worth it's worthwhile certainly as an upside swing down the road. It is also what, a 19 year old defenseman playing in the OHL. Like realistically, that's going to be a player who we see playing full-time top four minutes if everything goes right like four years from now. right? Which is not,

well, but you know, that's not a negative. Like Calgary has a lot of work to do here. If you're a player, if you're a player, you should be able to push in a couple years. And if he's not a player,

then he's not a player. And you're right, four, might be four years. Sure. I think your swing is. I just don't have an issue. I don't,

I don't really have an issue with a team in the Canucks position trading a player like that. No, no. Sorry, sorry. I'm just saying, I thought Calgary did fine.

Of course. Yeah, but I think the fit for Vancouver. Vancouver should have been all over that. because there's a chance that, you know, he is a volatile asset. There's also, you know, the volatility goes both ways. There's a chance that it's a complete steal.

Yeah. But you know, it's interesting. It's a significant price. I had our pal ran Lambert on yesterday and we broke down the trade and we did like 50 minutes on it. So I don't want to rehash a lot of that stuff. But we also had a very spirited debate, I thought. And it was a fun one about PDO and the Canucks because he kept referencing, obviously like how inflated their shooting percentages, right?

And then I kept couching everything with like, Yeah, but I think they're better than that, right? And so that we had this whole thing. He's like, you don't need to couch it. Like historically, teams like this always regrets and we had a full back and forth on it, right? And the only point that I wanted to make on that that I didn't at the time just in thinking about it more is I think when people cite a team's PDO as being high like this. But I think we generally agree, like if you watch this Canucks team play, especially their arc as the seasons developed. and like seeing clear improvements and also seeing

legitimate thought put behind like the way they play as well right like it's not really happening by accident like I think they're certainly trying to implement and do things that are yielding some results I think saying like what are they on pace for 119 points or something now right almost 120 saying well they're lucky to be 120 point team is not like the sage point that anyone saying that thinks it is well Vegas no team in the HL in the salary cap era is a true talent 120 point team unless you're working serious cap shenanigans because think about it at the start of the year every projection model like when Dom pumps out

his models 93 94 points but like top teams are like 105 106 107 Vegas I think had New Jersey and Carolina as the top two teams this year and they were 107.5 yeah like you would never project a team to be a 120 point team because so many things can go wrong along the way like to get there you're a 100-ish point team that gets a bit lucky, stays healthy, has a few things go right, and then all of a sudden, you work your way into that elevated tier.

And so I think that's just how hockey works, whether that's a good or bad thing. I think that's the reality of the situation. And the way we talk about it, I think, is just a bit off. It's kind of like I brought up power plays, right? It's like, we want you to score, but if you're scoring a lot on the power play, then you're a power play merchant, and that's not as honorable.

So that doesn't count the same. And that's how we talk about teams with a high PDO. I'm of two minds here because I think the Canucks, especially over the last month, have trended toward being a real contender. Vegas, however, as you note, doesn't move like we do. Vegas doesn't look at pace and think the Canucks are 120 points point team still. Like, you can go get there over under at 1095 right now, right now, minus 120 plus money

on the under. Like, that's available to you right now if you want to. If you want to put your money with your mouth is. Exactly. So, you know, I'd be surprised if the connect could get to 120 points. Like, the fact is that they've had the easiest schedule to this point in the year. Yep. And they're going to have the fifth toughest schedule the rest of the way.

They've got multiple games against Vegas, multiple. They haven't played Winnipeg yet. They've got four games against the Kings. Like, they've got a game left against Edmonton. I mean, there's a lot of fun games. Like, this is the thing. I'm saying, this isn't negative. This is not awesome.

Yeah, like let's go. Yeah. The Lindholm fit I like for them. You know, Dom's model upgraded them to 112 point projection. So Dom also doesn't see them as a under 20 point team or his model doesn't yet. Which no one reasonably should. But one thing, man, like one of the, you know, like false signals that I missed in evaluating this team. Because I thought they were coming into the season as, you know, one of those 93 to 95 point fringe points.

playoff teams, right? And they're going to blast my expectations out of the window. And I've missed big on that. And I hate that, obviously, but it's going to happen to everybody. It pains you every day. It pains me every day. Just to have missed. Like, I'm happy for the team and their fans, but the, the miss on my end, I've been thinking a lot about. Anyway, the thing about this is they played, like, I remember they played Seattle twice in preseason. And like buying into Sam Howell or Kenny Pickett, if you did, the preseason doesn't matter. I watched. Seattle play their systematic game and trounce the Canucks. And it's just when I think back to those games,

I remember buying in to the fact that Seattle thoughtfully had found a way to amplify their one-shot scorers. And I thought they'd stumbled on to something meaningful and that they'd be able to do it again this season. And shooting percentage regression came for them hard. They can't buy a goal. Yeah. The year prior, I know you and I both were buying the St. Louis Blues.

Now the St. Louis Blues are the large sample shooting percentage kings. Yeah. But we believe that they'd found some thoughtful ways to exceed. Yep. And ultimately, like, they're still an efficient shooting team, but it's not nearly enough. Mm-hmm.

There are things the Canucks are doing, traffic at the net, the way they play, the amount of talent on their roster that are helping them shoot at this clip. It's not all a fluke. Yeah. But, man, I have bought, every time I buy,

I lose. Yeah. And I can't ignore that either. Yeah. I just think for the purposes of evaluating the trade, like the distinction where if you think a team is that 93 point team true talent. I don't anymore. But let's say you did. And then they're actually, their PTO's high and they're on like a 105 point pace or something or low hundreds.

And then they're trading firsts and getting crazy to try to win now. And you're like, you're a fringe playoff team. I don't feel that way about the next team. I hate when teams do that because I'm like, I think you're getting fooled. No, no, no. This Canucks team should be going in. When you're a team who's clearly a team that's a hundred plus point team and then you're getting lucky and you're like obviously not a 120 point team, but you're playing at that level.

Then it's like, yeah, I do think this is a position for an organization that you should be going for it. Right. And so I think that's like differentiating between those two, I think is kind of important here. And obviously when a team's performing at this level, you're not going to have a lot of rational conversation. It's either you stink and you're lucky to be this good or we're never going to lose again. And in reality, it's never that simple. They've played well. Yeah. They've played like a contender for a month. Given the age of their best players and some of the

uncertainty on some of their best players, I think this is a year to go for it. They were right to make this purchase. I like the price paid, even though I think it's significant. And I really like the fit. But let me ask you a question. Does Lindholm need to at least hit, let's say 50% of his upside case offensively as a compliment to whether it's Patterson or Miller or even Garland. Does he have to be more offensively than he has been this season for this deal to be worth the price paid? He's playing at like a 15 goal pace so far.

I know. With a suppressed shooting percentage with inferior talent around him, I think that's part of the bet here. Certainly. And I think we like the bet that Lindholm can do more damage. He's an established 30 goals score, even if he's not a 42 goal score like he once was, right? But I do think there's some risk here to Vancouver and that he does need to

hit at least he needs to crest at least part of that offensive upside case doesn't have to be a 40 goal guy but at least 25 I think to justify the price paid even though he'll help the connects in the circle on the penalty kill on the power play and add center depth it's a calculated bet i think we both like it tom you're going to be on the road like a like a roadie just following around linholm during his first road trip but you'll be back in time for the super bowl just in time for the super bowl for our spread and our deranged very very excited so looking forward to that thanks for having me this was a blast thank you for answering the bat signal this was a loaded episode to close of the week, so hopefully people enjoyed it. Check out Tom's work, listen to Canucks Talk,

and we'll have them back on soon. Thank you to everyone for listening. Have a great weekend, and we'll be back on Monday with plenty more of the HockeyPedocast streaming on the Sportsnet Radio network.