Welcome back to WDYTT, the only hockey column on the internet that never clashes with your browser’s colour scheme.

Speaking of clashes, The Clash released “Should I Stay Or Should I Go” in 1982. There’s no way of knowing whether or not they were writing about Quinn Hughes, but given that Hughes wouldn’t be born until 1999, the odds seem low.

In any case, the song certainly applies to Hughes and his future with the Canucks. Or, at the very least, that’s what everyone and their dog presumes that Hughes is wondering right now. These past couple of weeks alone, we’ve heard reports that Hughes has already decided to leave, that he’s committed to Vancouver, and everything in between. The only thing we haven’t heard is a conclusive answer, and that’s when we usually turn to our WDYTT readers.

This is, perhaps, the biggest question in franchise history, because it centres around the best player in franchise history. It’s so big that we don’t really have the time or space to get into the wheres or whens, definitely not into the hows, and nowhere near the shoulds or shouldn’ts. Instead, we’re just going to treat this like a preseason question about the standings and stick to asking for your predictions.

If the Hughes decision is made around the 2026 Trade Deadline, that’s about three months away from now. If it’s made during the offseason, we’re about half a year away. Theoretically, the decision could be pushed even further down the road than that, so long as the city of Vancouver can sustain the weight of all the opinion pieces that generates.

But the only opinions we’re interested in today are your from-a-reasonable-distance predictions.

This week, we’re asking:

Let it be known in the comment section.

You answered below!

I’d keep the fans, might be helpful to have those moving forward.

This is a good question, I guess it may also depend on whether some trades would determine who stays. For example, if a trade of Hughes means the Canucks have to take back a player such as Dougie Hamilton, then that means you have a strong veteran presence on defense, so that makes one of the veteran defensemen, Myers or MPT, expendable.

The same situation could end up in the forward group.

But, of the current group. I know this won’t be popular, but I would hold onto Myers, as he is well-known to be a respected teammate that has a reputation of staying in shape year-round and takes younger players under his wing.

Up front is a little difficult as there are only two players, Garland and Sherwood that have the work ethic and qualities needed during a transition to a younger team, yet those two will be pretty valuable assets to trade.

I would only keep veterans that wanted to remain in that situation. The problem is that not many would probably want to. A complete teardown has its consequences.

Main part of the question would be: is Hughes staying or leaving ? If he stays then you build around him , and EP-40. Youngsters to try and keep would be Willander, Mancini, D-Petey, and Cootes. Everybody else is available for the right deal.

Sure, I would like to keep Sasson, Karlsson, and Räty. But if the right deal comes along, then move them.

If Hughes is traded, then those incoming assets could speed up this process.

A lot of a rebuild would of course be based on who you could get good value for. EP40, Boeser, and Demko, you couldn’t get a lot for right now – so they’re keepers. I agree with someone else who said Myers – as disliked as he is by some, he is a veteran presence that would be good to keep around. And of course none of the young high potential guys should go.

That leaves a lot of potential trades in a rebuild situation: Hughes of course as #1, followed by Sherwood and Garland.

It is what it is. If nothing else, this will make the weeks leading up to the draft a fun time for fans to speculate on what players to select with the multiple picks the team should get from the fire sale.

In a scorched earth scenario, which I wouldn’t support, I’m keeping anyone under 25. I would keep a few veterans that would still be good in three years at premium positions — center and RHD. Unless I get offers I can’t refuse, I’m keeping Hronek and EP40.

Asking which veterans to retain in a hypothetical scorched earth rebuild is probably one of the tougher questions I have seen, good job.

Surprising to many who know my comments, I’d keep EP40 but my rationale is that he has a hard contract to trade and you would never get decent value without significant retention. I think this team is stuck with him so may as well try and make the best with him for the time being. He has shown glimmers of a couple games here and there that he can be the player we want him to be, so here is to hoping.

I’d also keep Hronek. I have critiqued him at times, but that was generally in preseason when he was adapting to a new system and probably trying a few things out himself. He does strike me as a gamer who plays a lot of minutes in a position that is hard to fill so he can stick around. A veteran RHD will be needed to shelter Willander and Mancini, so Hronek is in.

I’m keeping DeBrusk-Petey-Boeser as vets and a top line. We still have to score some goals, right?

I’m also keeping Höglander and maybe even Garland if he really wants to stay regardless of the Hughes situation. (Garland can still be moved in the offseason before free agency if needed.)

On defense, I would hope to keep Hronek and that is about it. With hopes that he, Willander, and Mancini can hold down the right side. One of our trades needs to focus on left side defense, for obvious reasons.

Goalies are tough. I think you keep Demko and Lanks until one of them gives an indication they want to go try and win.

I know most want to move Demko, but we are going to have the space to keep him with a rebuild.

Also want to keep Garland. He is the hardest working forward on the team and he would probably make a good captain because he sets the tone for these guys. I think a lot of playoff teams would show interest in him, but I want him to stay as a mentor.

To me, all other vets are fair game. I want Hughes to stay, but in the business of hockey, I see the return this team can get as something that can set this franchise up for a generation if done properly. Other vets gone include Kane, Sherwood, Boeser, Demko, M. Pettersson, Myers, Forbort… pretty much anyone else older than 26 is fair game.

If it’s a true rebuild, I’m listening on offers for all the players.

I want all our current core that past and current management tried to build around traded. That core had too many chances already and failed. We need a fresh start and a new core to build around.

The premise here is rebuilding with Hughes being traded. The simple answer to who stays is no one currently older than 23. The full answer is much more complex.

There is a number of people who seem to believe if you trade out all your veterans and draft early and often, a contending team will magically appear. Never happens. You are destined to achieve the string of cups and playoff success the Leafs and Sabres have. Folks look at the exciting young players showing up on rebuilding teams and declare success. None of these rebuilding teams have won a playoff series yet and most haven’t made the playoffs.

Build a plan. You need a timeline and decide in advance how low you are willing to allow a team to sink. This determines how fast you trade out veterans. You prioritize who is traded out based on expiring contracts, the cost of re-signing, age, what a player returns in trade, and the replaceability of players.

The Bruins had a plan last deadline and traded out Carlo, Marchand, Frederic, and Coyle. They have gone from last in the division to third with players they got back or signed and they also have two first round picks in both the next two drafts. Unlikely they’re done and will probably continue to rebuild around Pastrnak, McAvoy, and Swayman.

The Habs have a plan. What makes theirs particularly good is it started while the Habs were still a strong team. They traded for Suzuki before they went to the SCF.

To answer the question in the context it was asked, who initially stays depends somewhat on who you get back for Hughes. Him leaving craters the D-corps, so in year one, you keep all of Hronek, MP, and Myers. You trade those guys, probably all three over the next couple years, depending on the development of the young D and if you get good young D back in any trades.

Part of a Hughes return should include a very good young top-six forward. Perhaps one that hasn’t fully emerged yet. You keep EP40 and DeBrusk to give him someone to play with. It would be tempting to keep Sherwood, but the offers are likely too good and re-signing cost too high. The goalie situation is too fluid to answer, but in two or three years, you don’t have Lankinen or Demko.

The farm team forwards from last season are fan favourites but in reality are all very replaceable. So is Lekkerimäki. You don’t “need” to move them, but if they can sweeten another trade off they go. Karlsson, Bains, and Sasson are not young. Maybe Räty is worth watching for another year before deciding.

The only player currently over 23 my plan would include still having here in ‘28/29 is EP40 and only if he maintains at least his current level of play. If he plays well, the size of his contract won’t be a burden to trade at that point if you have someone to replace him at 1C.

There are another couple smart things the Habs have done. While they acquired extra picks they haven’t hesitated to trade some of those picks for players they wanted to rebuild with. They have also maintained ample cap space so they could be flexible and capitalize on opportunities which might arise.

Management isn’t doing a scorched earth rebuild, Rutherford was pretty clear he’s only interested in moving the soon-to-be UFA veterans. However… getting the ball rolling like this tends to have a domino effect. Remove Sherwood and his scoring and the team does worse. The team does worse and other players want out. Then more want out and before long the team is forced into a lengthier rebuild.

It seems inevitable that Hughes is gone, and I’ll bet it happens at or near the deadline. Management wanted a commitment from Pettersson at a similar deadline before he signed, and I suspect they will do the same with Hughes. Once he’s out it’ll be interesting to see who else wants to go. I would keep M.P. to teach the young kids how to defend, and Garland for work ethic and team culture. Keep Pettersson. His value isn’t high right now but he’s trending up. He’s young enough to wait it out, and by then he should get better and his contract won’t be so egregious.

The major asset Canucks have to build the team is Quinn Hughes.

So he is the first person I would put on the trade block and try to build a bidding war for him.

From there, you will know what pieces you need when selling the five UFAs…who all must go.

And as the team takes shape, they have to decide on Petey…after the draft

If they have two other strong up-and-coming centres, then he is expendable.

I haven’t talked goalies yet. If Tolopilo looks good, then Demko, once recovered, needs to be shopped. He would look good on the Oilers or Leafs or just about any contending team without a star goalie. Could be a conditional pick and a player: Stanley cup Final gets a first, semis gets a second, quarters gets a third, just make the playoffs gets a fourth.