[MUSIC] >> Canuck Central Tuesday at Stan Reicho's Satyar Shah here in the Kintec Studio, Kintec. Canada's favorite orthotics provider, powered by thousands of five star Google reviews. Orphete, what are you waiting for? >> Canuck Central is for Enzahn Pacific Vancouver's premier Chrysler Dodge Ram and Jeep Superstore on Second Avenue between Canby and Maine, or at Enzahn Pacific Chrysler.ca. I believe we've figured it out, Martin Nachis. >> We got to roll the R. Martin. >> Martin Nachis. >> Nachis. >> Even before the show, you guys were still messing in. >> We were, but now I'm just correcting you every time. >> But I'm glad that we had, we got it out before the show. >> So now we're good. Nachis. >> How is it that a week following the Vancouver Canucks exit, a player who doesn't play for the Vancouver Canucks is the most mentioned player in the hockey market? >> That's how it works, man. We're off to the off season already. It's about how do you make the team better? >> I think Alia's Patterson is probably, he's probably texted Martin Nachis and said- >> Nachis. >> Is it? >> I'm going to let Nachis slide. >> Wait. How are you supposed to correct this? >> I don't want to hard seize all I'm saying. >> Nachis. It's Nachis. Sorry. >> Nachis. >> Nachis. >> Nachis. >> Nachis. >> I feel like Alia's Patterson is texted Martin Nachis. Nachis. >> Nachis. >> I swear it's not a bit. >> Said thank you for changing the conversation away from me and how terrible I was in the playoffs. All right. It's the open here on Canucks Central, let's get to it. >> Welcome to the open. >> That's your home. Are you too good for your home? Answer me. >> It's the open where we bring you the latest on the Vancouver Canucks and our take on it. And, you know, the whole background discussion on Martin Nachis is the Canucks are in dire need of somebody to help out in their top six. They need another big time forward. And I think they do need to do some work to acquire that from outside of the club. >> Yeah. >> But, you know, it wouldn't hurt to have two top six roles filled for this team, right? Do you want PewSooter to continue playing in a top six role? You'd love to have more options than less options if you are Patrick Levine and Rick Tockett. >> Absolutely. And if you're not bringing Lindholm back, well, it's not even so much about just adding a top six players about impact players. >> Yeah. >> So now you have to replace an impact player you had that made you as good as you were this past year in the playoffs, which you're trying to get better than. So that means in addition to that player, you still have to add a couple of guys, right? Or at least one player. And I know they mentioned some internal options. >> Yeah. >> It's just you don't seem overly confident that that's going to come to fruition. >> I mean, I'm not disputing the fact that they're open to see what these guys do in training camp. There's no doubt. But if we're being realistic, which internal candidate who spent most of last year, not with the Canucks, either in AHL or playing overseas, is legitimately going to knock on the door to play alongside Patterson or JT Miller next season? >> In a top six role. >> To begin the season. And stay there. And not just about, hey, does somebody come and show something and he's here for a week or two and gets sent down to literally be somebody we view as a solution? >> So the only option I would say is Nils Hoaglander, but he's spent most of this past season with the Big Club and had to graduate his way into a top six role. So we'll leave Hoaglander at the top of the list, but a little bit off to the side just for now. Do they have any other internal candidates to fill a top six role, even if it's not from the start of the season, can they progress? And obviously, like you spent a tenth overall pick on Vasily Podkolz, and I know it wasn't this front office that did that, but like he's got to be the biggest name on the list to potentially fill that role, does he not? I would say yes. But also, I maybe have just lost a little bit of confidence in Podkolz and being able to fill a top six role. I think it's a lot more realistic to see him just try to get his bearings and have a ton of success in a bottom of the lineup type role, which was, you know, I don't think he played poorly down the stretch of the season, but I mean, the stat line says it all. So, I think what he's showing is that he can be an everyday NHL player down your lineup. He has yet to show he can play up your lineup. And until he shows he can not only, you know, hang with those guys in terms of processing, but also being productive, I don't think we can earmark him for a spot up the lineup. The one thing I would say about Podkolz and he's often been compared to Ivan Barbachev by some of his own teammates and Barbachev obviously, you know, it's older and he's at a different level, far different level than especially Podkolz and his at, but it took Ivan Barbachev until the age of, I think it was 25, 24 to figure it out, 25 to figure it out. And now the past three years, he's been a really good player, he's 28 now. Yeah, I don't, I can see if you're looking at his ultimate ceiling and that if everything goes his way, he can potentially be that type of player. But I think the arc is going to be somewhat similar to Barbachev in terms of him becoming that player. It's going to take a while. Late bloomer. Yeah. And maybe it takes a few years for him to become the player you're hoping that he's going to be. And is that going to be in Vancouver or elsewhere? Who knows? But I do like him. I just don't think he's anywhere ready for us to look at him next season as being an option to play alongside Elias Patterson or JT Miller full time. Barbachev was taking just outside of the first rounds and did not have his big pop season until age 26. That's when he scored 26 goals with the St. Louis Blues and then followed that up with, actually that was when he got traded to Vegas in season and ended up going to win a cup. Even in the cup run with St. Louis, he was a 23 year old played mostly in a bottom six role and scored 14 goals, right? So that's kind of maybe where you're hoping Podkolzen can start to get to really be an ace down your lineup before graduating to a higher level. The thing is, Podkolzen already has an 11 goal season on record. Like his first year in Vancouver, he looked promising. We looked at his rookie season. Even Vasili Podkolzen got the Boudreau bump that year. He had 14 goals. Sorry. Excuse me. 14 goals, 26 points. He'll finish to the season for him. You know what? Up until Barbershev went up, I think 14 goals was his career high. Yeah. So that's where the comparison somewhat comes in too. He's kind of showing some of the things he showed. That wasn't his rookie season. And since then, it's been a battle for him, right? Like, only had four of the previous, the next year, 39 games in NHL spent most of the time in atmosphere for the rest of the season. Last year spent most time in atmosphere, came up to Vancouver, showed he can play, got the two year contract extension, but no goals in 19 games. Yeah. He still needs time to get there. And that's how I view Pudkolzen. I like him. I like his future. I just don't know if we can bank on him yet. The other candidates internally, outside of Nils Hoaglander and Vasili Podkolzen, of course. Lena's Carlson, we saw him play in the playoffs a little bit, seems to have at least be in the coach's good books with how he's performed and some of the things and traits that he brings as a player. There are steep banes, Otu Ratu, and of course, the ultimate wild card is Jonathan Lekoramaki. I know that's the one that a lot of our listeners are going to look to, but it's asking a lot for Jonathan Lekoramaki to be a fixture on the team next year. Now, I think we have to allow it as a possibility. That's why he makes the list. I think he is the dark horse candidate. When I look at those other guys, I think it's a bit of a stretch where Pudkolzen is, where Carlson is, where Ratu and those guys are, to make that leap. Well, we know the front office likes to slow-cook guys, so if Lekoramaki is going to have some runway to develop and get used to the North American game, then he's going to have to start the year in the HL. The only way he doesn't start the year in the HL is if he wildly outperforms all these other names on the list in training camp. Now, he did show this year, and he didn't make Sweden's World Championship team, but he did show this season that he was amongst one of the most talented players in the Swedish hockey league at times. Now, he wasn't able to keep his goal scoring going from start to finish. He finished strong, too, but it wasn't like he was red-hot all year, but he showed flashes and he showed in moments, he's one of the most talented players in the NHL. If he's one of those players that's that level of talent, those guys can sometimes expediate things because they show up and you're like, "Damn, this guy doesn't look out of place." I'd still think it's a stretch, but I think that's the only way it happens, that he shows up and not only looks good, but it's like he's undeniably good and good. Where we watch him, we're like, "Oh, yeah, you have to give this a real look in the regular season." And even then, it might be one of those things like, "Hey, you win a job at a camp, but the minute it slows down, you're going back to the NHL." Because I do think they want to develop these players and allow them to have time to develop. And for Lekramaki, still a teenager right now, he's going to be a very young 20 years old when camp starts in September. He was one of the youngest players drafted in the draft in 2022, so you have to still remind yourself of how young this player is. He's going to have to be undeniable in order to make the team at a camp and remain with the team after that. So it comes down to guys like Baines, Carlson, and Ratu, and even Ratu, still 21 years old, so he's still on the younger end of things. Baines and Carlson did get looks at different points this year. I think this is sort of where the issue comes in, is because if we're asking one of these players to be an internal candidate for a top six role, I'm not sure I see it just yet. And at some point, they may be that. One of those players may at some point in their career has become players that you can play higher in your lineup, but it's about progression. And it's asking a lot going from so far not being an everyday NHL player to bypass that step and play at the top of your lineup. It's just not realistic. And I think that's why when we look at how can this team improve, their internal candidates can make the team and maybe at spells take some runs playing with Patterson, playing with JT, and maybe they get hot doing it at times during the season, but not where you can sit there and say, "This is going to be this solution." So it's going to have to be from outside more than anything else, but is there anybody on the team that's young enough and can be a solution starting next year and be here a long term? It all comes back to one player. Now, he's not a candidate for the top six because he essentially was a top six player in the second half of the season, but he could help you scratch in the playoffs. How do we view Neil's Hoglander? No's Hoglander is, I mean, he had an unbelievable season, 24 goals, filled that top six role. I think they were still looking to maybe upgrade on him, come deadline time, but obviously it never came to fruition. And by that, you don't mean trade him. It was about have somebody come there and you can move down your lineup and play a better role. It's time to fully come in and bump Neil's Hoglander back down into a bottom six role. That never came to fruition. You had to rely on Hoglander. He's cheap. You need the cheap players. Pedersen's going to be more expensive. If you keep Peronik, he's going to be a lot more expensive. So you need production to come from guys who aren't making a ton of money. And I think Hoglander can do that, but when I think of Neil's Hoglander right now, I kind of think of like our him and Andre Kuzmenko, the Spider-Man meme, like that's what I'm getting at here. So this guy's just ran on shooting percentage. And the minute their goals dried up, you start to notice all the flaws in their game. And that's what happened in the playoffs. And then you're looking and you're watching some of the goals and you're like, why isn't Neil's Hoglander covering the point man? How did he get pulled away from there? And how does this keep happening? Why is he not in the right spots? Like that's what started to happen with Kuzmenko and it started to happen with Neil's Hoglander. It's also maybe the biggest comparison that matters being the one how the head coach views the player. Yeah. Because we saw it with Kuzmenko and it was clear, it was like he wasn't going to be a player that was going to work with talking and what he wants. And not to say that Kuzmenko and Hoglander are similar. Hoglander is younger. He has potential. He showed growth this season, there's reason to believe that he's a player still developing and learning and getting better, right? But he's also a player that got healthy scratch in the playoffs. And at no point this season, that his minutes really go past like maybe at 16, one game, 14, 15 here. But he played like 12 minutes in change, the average for the season, generally speaking. Not trusted in big situations outside a few moments here and there. So high shooting percentage, there's a coach truly trust them, but he has value. Yeah. And somebody that's truly a candidate for you to help you in your top six himself or help you get somebody to play in your top six for you next season. Well, if you were to like evaluate the Canucks trade assets, is it Nils Hoglander like a top caliber trade asset for this team right now? So, okay, I don't, so the best trade assets and I'm not saying you should trade these players or like you're a Mackie and Willander. Yeah. Right? So you most, if you got onto a phone call about something big, if you talk about players that are expendable, yeah, so to speak, or guys you're willing to move off of that aren't no untouchables or guys that if you're moving like Keramac or whomever that you're getting a star level player back, not just, you know, whatever, yeah, but like it's like it's Hoglander and pretty much that's it. Like you can look at some of the guys in the NHL, but we saw this too, the Canucks issue also was you were willing to move some of those guys. Yeah. And they didn't get them anywhere at the deadline. Like they couldn't close on some of the bigger players. So I question the value of the guys that are under him, like the Ratu guys, not to say they don't have value, but they're probably not going to get you what you want. No. You know, and Hoglander's like the only guy they have to make a decision on, either they believe in him, not only, you know, to be a decent guy that can play bottom of your lineup, but like to play up top of your line, or you have to cash in on him this offseason. Well, if you're trying to get a big piece in trades, teams are generally going to want at least one blue chip type piece. Podkolsen's not that. Ratu isn't that you don't have a first round pick in this upcoming draft. So yeah, Nils Hoglander, a 23 year olds, making a million bucks, just scored 24 goals all at five on five might I add, probably your best trade asset. And you know, that makes it for a very interesting conversation because it's almost as if I can just as easily see Nils Hoglander starting next season beside Elias Petterson again. But I could also see a scenario where he's not a member of the Vancouver Canucks. So if he next season, for instance, yeah, say score 17 goals, but isn't playing with Petterson, yeah, what do you think he's asking for contract wise? He's restricted free agent at that time, I believe he would have our brights as well. Yeah, 24 goal season under his belt and there's 17, 16 goal season is like a three, three and a half million dollar player on a bridge deal of some kind, right? To me, I would buy into Hoglander being here long term and signing him to a long term contract. If you believe that we see that he can play up your lineup consistently and also have a special team value, but you can't be paying guys four million, three and a half, four million to only have 10, 12 minutes of five on five value every game. Like there has to be more there. Yeah. The reason you're willing to maybe fork out three, three and a half or a Dakota Joshua, he's got a lot of PK value, big physical, great four checker consistent, somewhat consistent with that. They started to utilize him on the second unit power play as well in a net front role. So he would have a little bit of special teams value as well Dakota Joshua. Whereas Hoglander, I mean, he played a little bit on the second unit power play, but in bringing it back to what you mentioned about Kuzmenko though, I think that's going to be the big question because we talked about things yesterday that they can learn from and reapply from last year, but also like not do again. Well one was a Kuzmenko one, right? And maybe they view their process as, hey, our process was correct. He scored 39 goals. He was terrific. Yeah. The fans loved him. He had star potential. There was, you know, there was maybe he could be even better or whatever is worth bringing him back. It didn't work out. Or did he view it as, hey, there were some red flags, we probably should have worked that more closely. And it's not the same with Hoglander, but there are similarities, especially when you're looking at, you're pretty close to having to pay the player to. Yeah. So I think that's going to be the big determination, I think, in terms of their trade assets, because if they don't move Hoglander and they're not trading in the lick hair, macking and well Lander, I don't think you can be realistic about being a part of any big trades, you know, because, hey, you can do maybe heronic or something. Yeah. But in addition to that, you're, you know, there aren't a ton of guys that have super value for them prospects-wise, like somebody's asking us about put Colson, he's not their value wise right now. But if he has a good year next year and does the whole, if it does the Hoglander, then all of a sudden he has value either to you or an untrade. Well, Pod Colson is kind of in a place where Hoglander was maybe last summer, where like teams would take the player from you to take a chance on them, but they don't have exactly like a ton of value. As far as Hoglander and Kuzmenko and why I made the comparison earlier, Kuzmenko in 2223 at 5 on 5, his shooting percentage was 22 and a half. This past year, Nils Hoglander, his 5 on 5 shooting percentage, just to shade under 22%. So essentially the same thing. And you know, Hoglander did a lot of good things. And I remember saying it about Kuzmenko a couple of years ago, like if you're expecting this guy to score close to 40 goals, again, probably don't think that. You know, shooting percentage, some of it is repeatable, but when it's that high, it's not completely repeatable. You're right. And you know, Mike texts in and says Hoglander is only 23 coming off 24 goals. He's a huge piece for the Canucks future. He says Petey and Nils are friends, the relationship matters, he stays. I don't know how much those things matter, to be honest. And I think to be honest too, I just had to buzz a package and sorry. Yeah. That's all good. You know, it's one of those things. But to your point about trying to extrapolate how many goals can Hoglander score next year, his minutes were also super low. Yeah. But if you believe in the player and you believe that he can stick and he can play three or four more minutes per game, so consistently, my problem is like, he makes the same mistakes. No, you're right. But I'm just saying like in terms of like, you're still looking at a player to the point that's 23 years old. Like if you believe that he can play more minutes consistently for you, I think the shooting percentage can be mitigated because he's going to shoot the puck more. Yeah. You know what I mean? Like, if he shoots the puck more, let's say he goes down to 12%, well, can he be at 18, 19 goals? Yeah. You know, 20 goals, perhaps? You know what I mean? That's where I think it's possible, but it all comes down to again to you saying he repeats the same mistakes. Does a coach trust him enough that you believe you can invest in this player and for that to work here long term for you? That's the biggest question. I think you have to ask. And that's where their relationship between talk it and management really matters in these types of situations about being really honest about, hey, how does this player fit and what should we truly do with this player long term? The hardest thing for coaches to get behind is when players are making the same mistakes. Yeah. One of the, one of the first things, I mean, in any job, any business, one of the first things I learned in radio was like, or one of the first things the guy that was training me on the board when I first started in radio was like, look, I know you're going to make mistakes. Don't make the same mistake twice. And this guy was like, he was bat leap crazy. Yeah. Okay. And he struck the fear of God into me as a intern coming out of college. And he was just like, look, don't make the same mistake twice. Yes. Okay. Get it up. But you know, and look, it's going to happen at the NHL level where you're going to get beat, you're going to make the wrong reads. But when it consistently happens in similar ways, that's when coaches really start to lose trust. And that's how you get healthy scratched in the playoffs. And again, like, because he's young enough, yeah, you can, you can look at it as, hey, we have an investment here that we believe can come, you know, true for us in a couple years or whatever, it's just, I mean, personally, I would trade whole nine or the soft season. Yeah. Because I just don't see it really fitting in terms of the top six here long term. And I think this is your best time to give value for the player. You're never going to have him be more valuable in the trademark than he is for you today. That's bold. Yeah. I mean, obviously, I'd have to know what's coming back in return. Yeah. I'm not giving him away, but knowing that you're in a contending window and you're looking to add or you're going big game hunting, as the kids like to say, is Nils Hoaglander is one of your top pieces. If not your top piece, unless you're getting something real big that warrants trading one of your ultimate top prospects in order to acquire something. So I get it. It's very much an interesting off season. And for as much as we all like how Nils Hoaglander played this year, that'd be realistic about the situation. And that's what we're doing here on Canucks Central. All right. Canucks Central Roundup. Not too much news on the Vancouver Canucks, of course, with the off season in full swing. But the Canucks Central Roundup, we take a look elsewhere, Don Waddell announced as president of hockey ops and GM of the blue jackets. It's an interesting one. I think there's some question about just how much Don Waddell was the ultimate decision-maker in Carolina. And now he's going to Columbus as the president of hockey ops and GM. So he's clearly going to be that guy. I guess my thing with Don Waddell is for as good as Carolina has been recently and their process of collecting players has been unbelievable. I'll never be able to shake his time in lengthy time in Atlanta and how poorly things went there. Yeah. And I mean, I think it's fair because it's on your record and you have to be responsible for your record. It's also 20 years ago. Maybe I should get over it. Maybe I'm the problem. But it's also like, yeah, you can get better. You can learn from mistakes. Yes. You know what I mean? Like, I think sometimes we look at GMs and coaches that have made mistakes in the past as like, oh, this guy doesn't know what he's doing. It's like, well, there's also the, you know, real experience and getting better from it and being able to learn. The biggest question I have for people is, do you learn? Yeah. And if you can learn, man, you become a better person and become smarter. You become better at your job. And the more experience you have and the more lessons you learn, the better you become at your job. So I wouldn't hold it against them too much. But at the same time, I think it's going to show us whether his work in Carolina was truly based on a lot of stuff he was hands on on or the fact that he took a lot of reports from other people and they came to consensus decisions. Now that also shows you, though, not to be overly negative. If he's somebody that's, who doesn't have enough of an ego where he has to make the final decision. Would he be a collaborator in Carolina? Would he be able to put together a good situation or in a good front office that would be collaborative and come together to make some good decisions? So there is that upside too, right? I do remember when Tom Dunden first took over as the owner of the Carolina hurricane. He was like, people made fun of him for being like, I want to create a formula that helps us identify players that helps us value players and all these things. And it sounded very like corporate and all, but Carolina, to some extent, has been able to do that. And they've had some level of success. Not ultimate success, but they've been a pretty good team for a lot of years. And the Seattle Kraken have announced their new head coach, it is Dan Bilesma. He is getting this coaching gig fresh off of being the Coachella Valley coach. So it is a higher within the organization. They get the promotion from their AHL coach coming to the NHL team. Yeah. It was really interesting because obviously you won a championship. He had a lot of success in Pittsburgh and, you know, it didn't end well, but not that it was horrible. They lost in the second round, he got fired and he had poorly in Buffalo, like it does for everybody. Well, that's a thing. Like when has half things gone well in Buffalo, like the past like two and a half decades have been absolute, you know, horror shows. And ever since then, and that was seven years ago, he's kind of been an assistant or been in the AHL. So I mean, you know, it could be a smart hire, like you're talking about somebody who had a lot of success in the past, had some failures, lessons again. Something he talked about a lot today and his time away from the NHL. And he learned a lot and one of his focuses was, you know, how he builds relationships with players. And that's part of the reason I'm sure he's getting the job with Seattle, obviously Shane Wright and some of their other younger prospects working with him in Coachella Valley. All right. Erfan Gefar is going to join us. We'll get into the Stanley Cup playoffs, the conference finals as Owen Newkirk will join us as well. Dallas Stars radio host, they took a two one series lead on Edmonton yesterday. We're listening to Canucks Central. [MUSIC PLAYING]
