(upbeat music) - Canuck Central Thursday. It's Dan Reachow, Satyarsha here in the Kintek Studio. In the glow of a big win over the Arizona Coyotes. At the death, Connor Galland, with the big goal. Man BCLC was laughing at us last night, hey? - Oh, big time. But hey, I mean, hey, my bet cashed anyway, so I'm not gonna go. I have nothing to apologize for. I don't. - This is nonchalant, like, oh yeah, well, you know, my bet cashed. - It is. - So I have nothing to apologize for. (laughs) - Satyars was selection. Got the dub, mine did not. Which quietly has been a lot better. The last little while, you know. - Yeah. - It's been a sneaky producing, like Connor Garland. - Yeah, Connor Garland, see, I'm like Garland, you know, coming up strong towards the end of the season. - Since when did Connor Garland become the Canucks best forward? Like, did that just like happen right under our eyes? - Seems like it. (laughs) - We talked about, I know there was a lot of comments. I made one myself about the Dylan Gunther goal last night. And it's like, yeah, you knew this was coming against the Canucks. And I was like, as soon as Garland saw that, he was like, nah, I'm scored. - Yeah. - I'm winning this game now. There's no way. Not letting the guy that I was traded for end up being the guy that wins the game, or that gets the Coyotes back into this. - This punk can't take my shine. (laughs) - Oh, it was a big win for the Vancouver Canucks. We'll get into that more. It's the open. (dramatic music) - Welcome to the open. - Oh, that's your home. Are you too good for your home? - Answer me. - Canucks is still away from home until the end of the week. They'll head to Los Angeles and play the late, not the Lakers, the Los Angeles Kings. - Yeah. - They would win that game. - That would be cool. - Yeah, yeah, yeah, on the sport. - Kind of like, who do you think on the Lakers would be the best hockey player? Is it LeBron? I wonder if any of them can skate. - That's the thing. Whoever can skate. - LeBron's just like the best natural athlete. - Yeah, he is. Whoever can skate would be their best player, yeah. - That's probably the correct answer. If any of them can skate, they would be the best one. So, yes, they'll close out their little three-game roadie in Los Angeles on Saturday. But last night's win inches them a little bit closer to the Pacific Division title. We'll get to that in the Canucks Central Roundup, but it's the open where we give you the latest on the Vancouver Canucks and our takeaways on it. And the latest is Jim Rutherford speaking to our friends, our buddy, the Triple Threats Ian McIntyre. We hear him on the Canucks Central post-game show. You watch him during Canucks games with Sat and Murph on the panel during Intermissions. And of course, you read his great work at sportsnet.ca. And he gets an exclusive interview Q&A with Jim Rutherford. - Great stuff from IMac. And some notable things because anytime Jim Rutherford speaks, something notable does get said, he-- - He always makes sure to drop some kind of a nugget that he knows we'll be able to chew on. - And I think the ones that stood out the most to us was his comments on the free agents. - Yes. - And it's very clear, they wanna keep a couple of guys. One's an RFA, of course, in Filiparona. And the other one, Dakota Joshua. It was interesting how straightforward he was in terms of their desire to get something done with Dakota Joshua. - It's surprising, you know, when he is as blunt as that, it makes it feel like there's almost no chance that it doesn't get done. So IMac is simply following up on the question about all of the unrestricted free agents that the Canucks have to deal with. And in a roundabout way, Jim Rutherford basically says, "Well, if you wanna stay in Vancouver, then you know, you're gonna have to essentially lower your asks." He says that in so many words. - Oh, we see like good cop, bad cop. Like, Alvin Keeman as the bad cop is like, "Well, if you take a discount." - Yeah. - But Rutherford's like, "Hey, you wanna get something done? Come and talk to me, buddy. We'll get something done." - We'll figure it out. But, you know, he makes it certain to say that if you wanna stay in Vancouver, then maybe we can work something out. And then when he's followed up about Dakota Joshua, is it fair to say that Dakota Joshua is at the top of your list? Yes, I would say he's a priority for us. - Yeah, no, he's a priority. - Simple terms. I mean, honestly, the question is, what is a contract going to look like? And will something get done before the season starts? - I mean, before the season ends. - If you're Joshua, though, do you really have any incentive to sign right now? - I think you do twofold. If you're happy and want to stay here. - Right. - And the other one is you just came off an injury. The playoffs are coming up, it's going to be a battle. - Yeah. - You're gonna go out there and play with fire and brimstone. Who knows what can happen? - Yeah. - What if you have a bad injury? What if something goes wrong, right? Especially with the type of player that he is. So, I do think there is some incentive from that standpoint, but it comes down to his desire to wanting to be here. - I, his desire to want to be here and, you know, I guess if you're looking at it from a Canucks perspective, you know, what's it going to take to get this guy to sign today and not even have a look at free agency? And is that going to cost you $10 to $12 million? Probably more than $10 million. Probably closer to the 12 range. It's very realistic to think that Joshua can get, you know, four years by 3 million per on the open market. And guys like Joel Armia got that a few years ago from the Montreal Canadiens. Obviously that contract hasn't really worked out, but similar type of profile to what Joshua put down on paper. Even Brandon Tanev, like he got six years from Jim Rutherford in Pittsburgh and similar kind of storyline, late bloomer, didn't have a ton of games played in the NHL, has won 14 gold season where he shows he's got some two-way value, can score a little bit and is a really good defensive player in your bottom six, can PK and smart teams really value those guys. Jim Rutherford valued him a lot more than everybody else and made sure to get him in free agency. So when you look at Joshua, he is similarly unique. He's got the size, he's got speed, he's got two-way positional value because he's shown he's got a mindset defensively, he can PK and he's got some chopped scoring goals from in and around the blue paint. So, I mean, if I'm Joshua and his agent, I see the factors here and I see cap going up, like there's a chance I could strike big in free agency. - Yeah, but I wonder just how big, you know? And I don't disagree, but as Tanev, an indicator of what he's going to get or is he an outlier? - Yeah. - Miles Wood played more, but you also got a similarly long contract for being a similar type of player, you know? Kind of a guy who plays more third-line minutes. - Yeah. - More of a checking role, but he can play on the PK, has a little bit of pop, obviously, can move it up down your line up a little bit. I mean, a lot of positives to his game, but-- - Miles Wood even had like significant injury history, too. - Yeah. - You got that contract from Colorado. - I mean, I think we were all surprised on that one, but maybe, right? Now, even some other guys who got paid and I look at a guy like Mason Marchman, for instance, when he went to Florida. - Yeah, when he went from Florida to the Dallas Stars, I mean, he signed a four-by-four contract. And he produced, I think, a little bit more than what Joshua had done as well, but kind of a bigger guy, has a little bit of grit to his game, maybe even more prolific as a scorer and about four million. So I think, to me, the absolute high end would be something like four-by-four somewhere. And even that, I'm kind of skeptical about, I wonder, 'cause right now, we're talking about a player who's having his best impact. It's kind of like Hironic before it was like, well, Hironic can maybe push for eight and a half million, nine million, when he scored 60 points, and now you're looking at it kind of evening out. So I think we might be overstating overall, maybe the top value of what Joshua can get, but I think it's kind of in line with something, you mentioned like 12 million. Would a banker would do something like, say, three million times three or four? Three times four would be $12 million. - Yeah, and if you're Joshua and his camp, hey, I'm not the player. I've never had $12 million sitting on a table in front of me, if you gave me $12 million, where do I sign the contract, right? That's a note to camp. Which will never happen in radio, by the way. Not even close. - He's just turning us off. - You're paying for our golf. - Yeah, maybe 12 cents. But the point of it is, it's kind of hard to turn that down when it's put in front of you. - Yeah. - Knowing that, yeah, you might be able to get something like that in unrestricted free agency, but you also might not. Kevin Kiermeyer thought he was going to get a nice contract and free agency this winter from somebody else after any good, nice, really strong season with the Blue Jays. Guess what happened with Kevin Kiermeyer? He went walking back to the Blue Jays like, "Hey, guys, I'm still interested in having me back. I love my year here. I was very happy." - What happened with a lot of baseball players this winter? So, yeah, you know, the cap is going up and certainly there's going to be a little bit more money going around the league. And teams are going to be wanting to add players. And Joshua should have some interest in them. Does that mean he's absolutely going to get between $12 and $15 million on the unrestricted free agent market? It's not a guarantee. Nothing's a guarantee, but if you were to get that kind of money from the Canucks, I would say it's hard to turn away. And even still, if I'm Vancouver, I do have some hesitation about giving that kind of a contract to Dakota Joshua. I understand sometimes you got to go to uncomfortable places to make sure you keep pretty good hockey players or guys that have shown to be pretty good hockey players. But I don't know if I've seen enough of a sample size to really want to lock Dakota Joshua into a four year term. - And I think that's fair. And especially with, as we saw, he came into training camp. He didn't have the off season they had hoped he would have. - Yeah. - And he had healthy, I mean, we forget, he was healthy scratched early part of the season. It was only one game, but he was healthy. - I knew he was in the dog house in training camp. - He was. And now, obviously, he's worked through it. And it's not like he showed up in bad shape. It's just the coach said a very high bar. Most players on the team met that bar. Joshua was one of the players who did not meet that bar. So yes, it's a bit of a cautionary sign, maybe. You say to yourself, especially once he gets the contract, is he going to be able to put the work in that's necessary consistently in the off season to be able to make good on the investment? But I think part of the price is going to be baked into that a little bit. That's why I'm, and I think this is the same thing for most people looking at Dakota Joshua, too, around the league where they would be intrigued by him, but they also see similar things in terms of how long it took him to get here. You know, how disciplined is he overall in terms of a guy you can trust to give that type of money to in terms of a three or four year contract. So that's why I don't see the four million plus deal out there for him. So I think, is it worth the risk if you get him signed for three million per season? - Yeah. - Or is there a world where it's like, say, the connects do four years and it's like 2.8 or something? You know, like, if you got that number, I'd be inclined to roll the dice on it. - Yeah. - If you were talking about three million plus, that's where I'm like, you know what? Like, it's just, I'm not sure you're going to be getting any real surplus value here. And is it actually worth you locking into it? But if it's around three or slightly below, like to me, I would roll the dice on it. - And is he giving you the same type of value if he's not playing with Connor Garland? Now, he still had 11 goals in 79 games last year. - So, well, I'd say the reason why I'd be inclined to, as long as the number works, I would be okay to roll the dice is because he has shown standalone value. His four checking is, he's one of the better four checkers on the team. He's really good along the walls. He's become a good wall guy, right? He's got a decent shot. That stands out. And he's become an integral penalty killer. - Yeah. - He's good defensively. So I think there's standalone value that he's going to do his job and provide the type of hockey you need plus the size element, plus the pushback element too, the physicality that he has. So I think that value is what I'm comfortable with. What gives you maybe, why people who think he's going to get overpaid is, we've seen what it looks like when it clicks with somebody. And what if, next year, they play together again, and then he scores 22 goals or something. Then it's like, now it's like, wow, right? But that's where the pop happens if you can find the right matchup with it. But I do think there's enough standalone value that I feel okay with it, even if it's not going to be with Connor Garland long term. - You've got to be, if you're going to give him $3 million, you've got to be okay with him scoring between 10 and 15 goals, maybe get 30 points and bring you those other things that are a part of his game, the physicality, the penalty killing. - But I think people also have to be realistic because much like even Ilya Mikayev, and you see what it's like right now, those types of players, when they're off in a year, may have a year like Mikayev's having. - Yeah. - And then it looks like, it's like, well, you're paying this guy so much money, like what's going on, right? - You've been this guy what? He handles the puck like it's a grenade, like what's going on. - And I think organizationally, they think highly of Mikayev too, and they like Mikayev still, right? And I think everybody understands that next year he should be better, but that doesn't help you today. But so just, I'm just saying, if even those who want him signed, if you're expecting that it's this trajectory he's on, is going to exponentially grow, you have to just pump the brakes a little bit. Like he may be what he's showing to be, not that he's something else that he's going to pop into necessarily, right? And are you comfortable, like you said, with a player that's going to get 3 million, but might give you 10 to 12 goals some years? - So, that's on Joshua. It's not under the question that some of these UFAs signed before the season's end, but if you get into the playoffs or other for it, so that's going to be a little bit more tricky. So we'll see how that develops here over the next little while. They are hopeful that they can get something done with Philip Hronic. And it's an interesting quote. So Imac asks, has there been any developments regarding Restricted Free Agent Philip Hronic? Jim Rutherford quote, "There's nothing I can tell you contract-wise other than the fact that we like this player, and he has brought a certain element to this team and helped us get to where we are. But he's also a free agent that will be on the upper end of the scale as far as a cap hit. Hopefully, we can figure out something at some point in time. That's the quote from Jim Rutherford. - Sounds hopeful, doesn't it? Generally, you know? You're not as convinced, you're like eh. - It's definitely hopeful, but there's clearly no guarantees in there. - Well, of course. I mean, he also didn't guarantee anything with Joshua either. - It's not as, but with Joshua, it's like yes, it's a priority. - And he was asked, is it a priority? And he said yes. - There's a button here, though. But he's also a free agent that will be on the upper end of the scale as far as a cap hit. Hopefully, we can figure out something at some point in time. - So are you getting JT Miller vibes or Bullhorvat vibes? - I'm getting Jim Rutherford doesn't want to pay Philip Ronik a certain amount of money. - Yes. - Well, I think that's clear. There's a ceiling that they have of what they're willing to pay Philip Ronik. And currently, it doesn't seem like Ronik and his camp have come off that ceiling. - I mean, it's clear because of what even Alvin told us when he was on with us after the trade deadline. And he said they've made an offer to Philip Ronik that they think is fair. - Yes. - That was over a month ago now, no, weeks ago now. - This is trade deadline, so yeah, March 8th. - March 8th, yeah, so it's like almost a month ago now. He hasn't signed, has he? - No. - Which means the offer put in front of him that the Canucks thought was fair. - Yes. - Was not reciprocated or thought to be as fair by the Ronik camp. - And it tells you-- - It's not to say it's been rejected, but it hasn't been signed either. - Right, and if you're saying we think that's fair, that means the wiggle room on that is probably not significant. - Right. - So that tells you there's a line. And it comes back down to the numbers we've heard. Is he pushing for eight times eight? - Yeah, and if you are, it doesn't sound like that's an area the Canucks are comfortable going to. And as we've talked about, would they be comfortable going to any number that is above what Quinn Hughes is making? Maybe on the total money value, but not on the average annual value. And I still think that's the upper end of what Phillip Ronik can't expect to get in Vancouver. I don't know, this one feels like it's out of stalemate. It's clear from Jim Rutherford and Patrick Levine's discussion points on this that they don't feel Phillip Ronik, like when it was with Pedersen, it was obvious that they were like, we'll roll out the red carpet. Whatever Pedersen's happy with, we're happy with. If Elias is happy with this, we're more than happy with it. Short term, long term, doesn't matter. We're good. As long as Elias wants to stay in Vancouver. This is more, yeah, we like you, but there's a certain level to how much we like you. - It's very much bullhore bad vibes in that sense, where it's like we're not going to do everything humanly possible. - And the thing was, they would have done the same thing. As much as we sit here and say, they chose JT over bull, yes, they did. But at the same time, if JT was going to push for nine million, for instance, he wouldn't have been a Canucks. - Yeah. - They would have traded him too. They weren't going to pay him nine million, for instance. And now when you look at the contract and him coming off the 99 point season and what he's doing now, you wonder if JT could have bet on himself a bit more. Now he didn't have the best year heading into free agency, but still at 82 points and given the free agent markets, maybe somebody would have given him nine times seven, which is still the same money as getting, you know, eight times seven, you know what I mean? So, no, sorry, nine times seven, which is a million more, right? So I mean, could he have gotten that a free agency maybe? Perhaps. The JT played ball of stay in Vancouver. - Yes. - Coming off a 99 point season, signing for eight million per season, he was willing to take that type of money, right? Bow clearly wanted the higher end. The Canucks were like, no, we're not doing that for you. And I think it's the same thing for Phillip Verona. If he wants the higher end, it's not going to be Vancouver. - They've been pretty steady with how they negotiate contracts, even at the upper end of their roster. He was asked about Elias Pederson not too concerned. Is, says, Pederson is not himself right now, but they're not too concerned about it. They know how good of a player he can be and they expect it to show up sooner rather than later. We'll get more into that, Brandon Batzler is going to join us. But he also mentioned towards the end of the piece about looking at getting wing help in the off season, knowing that that's something they're going to have to look at. He was asked, how much work do you have left in building this team? And he goes on to say towards the end of the quote, maybe we'll look at getting more production from our wingers. And it goes on a little bit further than that. You can read the full piece at sportsnet.ca. It's what we've been talking about. And to their credit, I mean, they identified this pretty much early on this season, well ahead of the trade deadline. That's why they went out and got Elias Lindholm after they got Zadorov. They're like, okay, now we gotta focus on trying to find some forward help. And they tried to get even Gensil after they got Lindholm. They tried to get to Foley after they got Lindholm. So they knew that they were a couple of forward short even after getting or they were still a forward short even after getting Elias Lindholm. And I wonder if they go into the summer saying getting help on the wing. Another offensive driver is a big priority for us. Or if it's, we like having strong down the middle and good on defense and we understand there's a certain price that we're willing to pay for wingers, it'd be nice to have some great ones, but also we can't overextend in those areas. - Yeah, it's very clear how they want to build a team. You're right, but I do think they're willing to probably have one high end winger. When we saw with their MO2 in Pittsburgh, they went out and got Kessel. They weren't afraid of doing that, right? So I do think they're very much open to having the one. The question is who's that guy going to be? And the season Brock Besser is having, he can demand the type of money of that type of winger they want. - Yeah, right, he could demand that with a season he's at. - Is he the demand eight million dollars? Like if they wanted to talk contract on July 1st, coming off a 40 goal season, like what? - You could ask for more even. - Yeah. - You know he could. Now the question is who's willing to pay that to him, but if you're coming off a 40 goal season, you can ask for over eight million dollars. I don't know if that's going to be a Vancouver again. So if it's not going to be Besser, then I do think they'd be willing to add somebody that could be maybe makes eight or nine million. The rest of those guys, you're right, I think they would be more careful with, okay, instead of going out and then paying six or seven million for a guy that might get us 30 goals, we'd rather spend four or five million, three million, on guys that are maybe in the 15 to 20 range that do multiple different things for us. And we get more value out of those types of players, instead of paying a guy who doesn't do much but score goals to get 25 in a season maybe. - I still think they firmly believe like being strong down the middle of the ice and having a good decor is what's going to be the biggest factor in them being able to get consistent results. You can quibble with that, but look at the way this team plays. They're a defensive hockey team and they understand what makes them tick. That's why I just, he says they will be looking at the winger market. I just wonder if that's ahead of making sure they find out what they have on D, whether that's Roanick, beyond Roanick. Remember they only have Quinn Hughes. Roanick is under control and Noah Juleson. Beyond that, it's, and Carson Soussey of course, but beyond that, they don't have any defense been signed for next season. You know, on the offense note, and we'll continue this into our conversation with Batch. But last night wasn't exactly, I mean, yes, they were well in control of that game for much of it. Coyote started to gain some traction in the third period, maybe as the Canucks lost their legs. But in this ongoing conversation of where the Canucks are at offensively, and how worried we should be about this team's offensive production, just feels like if Quinn Hughes isn't on the ice right now, they're not really generating all that much that is very threatening. - Well, he's been their engine, you know, and as much as, I mean, Garland has been too. I mean, you mentioned off the top, he scored the goal and, you know, he's been really caring the team. And he really has, he's been a real engine for this team offensively. - Was that one of those like, missed a net on purpose shots from Quinn Hughes? - Yeah, maybe, I can't, yeah, look like it, right? It kind of looked like you kind of wanted to create like a rebound off of the boards, right? And I would say, I think part of the problem too, is especially right now, is they are, they have Garland Miller together with Joshua. - Yeah. - I think we would see more spread out offense if JT was on his own line, and Garland and Joshua were back on a separate line. I think the lineup would look longer. I think you would get more sustained pressure at times, and maybe we'd get more scoring chances. But right now, it seems like you're right. It's like, it's that line and Quinn Hughes. And that's pretty much it. Everybody else's, like, again, like I thought the Pedersen line last night created opportunities. - Yeah. - But Pedersen himself, when he has opportunities, isn't driving, like we talked about this yesterday, like he's not a threat to score himself individually. Passing off looks, right? He's not being as aggressive as he can be and should be, right? But they're all playing overall pretty good two-way hockey. I would say, even against Arizona though last night, they gave up way too many grade A chances, especially in the third. - Yeah. - So if you don't want to be doing it. So that's something that, again, staples wise, they have to clean up. But I think once they get back to JT and Besser together and Lindhomes in, and they go maybe Lindhomes with Garland and Joshua, and hopefully Pedersen starts being aggressive again, that's where I could see the line of looking more threatening. But right now, they kind of have all their eggs in a basket forward group wise. - Yep. - Especially with Besser and Miller not, and Besser and Pedersen not going together. I think that's limiting a lot of their offensive output right now. - Quickly on the Canucks Central round up to him. Rutherford did say as far as injuries, concerns go, he is expecting everybody to be fully healthy and ready to go for the playoffs as it currently stands. So that includes Lindhomes, that includes that. Your Demco, the Canucks magic number sits at nine after their win in Arizona. Edmonton got their butts handed to them by the Dallas Stars last night. And so, what does that mean? What's the magic number? - 29, it's combined points gained by the Vancouver Canucks and points lost by the Edmonton Oilers that will lead the Canucks to win the Pacific Division. So, magic number sits at nine. - Yeah, as unconvincing as the Canucks performance maybe was overall against their opponent, the most important thing was Edmonton loss, Vancouver won. They just have to win like what, three more games? - Yeah. - And they can do better, but just win three more games. - And with Edmonton's schedule, it's gonna be interesting to see how many games they're able to win before the end of the season as well. Canucks get LA on Saturday, LA in closer to clinching their playoff spot with a 5-2 win over Seattle last night. JT Miller just nine points away from a top five season in Canucks history. Could surpass Daniel Sadeen for 104 points if he gets to that nine. And Arshteep Baines was sent back to Abbotsford earlier today. Patrick Levine, Canucks general manager announced. Brendan Batchler, Canucks play-by-play man is next on Sportsnet 650, Canucks Central. - Hey, it's Mike Alford and Jason Bruff. Join us for Alford and Bruff in the morning, weekdays from six to nine a.m. on Sportsnet 650. - Or on demand anytime through your favorite podcast app.
