Welcome back to WDYTT, the only hockey column on the internet, posted entirely in rough-draft format.

Speaking of rough drafts, a few of those in a row, and a rebuild might be in trouble. So far, so good for the rebuilding Vancouver Canucks. But it’s easy enough to be excited about a rebuild at the outset of it, when it’s nothing but potential and possibility ahead.

That can’t last forever, of course. After a certain period of time, a rebuild has to stop being ongoing. At a certain point, it either turns into a rebuilt, or the rebuild has to start being re-rebuilt.

The clearest and first measure of success available is probably when a rebuilding team makes it all the way back to the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Most will agree that these Canucks, still within Year One of the declared rebuild, are a long way off of that. But how long, and how many ways?

That’s the topic of our column today.

The vast majority of the fanbase seems bunkered in for the rebuild, and the further losing they will have to endure in the process. But everyone also probably has an ETA for when that wait is over, and we’re curious to see where everyone’s head is at.

This week, we’re keeping it simple and asking:

Let it be known in the comment section.

You answered below!

‘A’ for the plan/vision but it’s too early to fully judge the execution of the plan given the offseason is still in motion, so I would say “incomplete’ there – but good progress and signs thus far.

A+ so far. Höglander turns into a third and Gallagher. M.Petterson turns into a first and Oleksiak, add Schenn and Cotter and all the additions on short contracts that can be flipped for more picks. Woop Woop!

I have to give it an A. No long-term deals given out willy-nilly, picks not traded away flippantly, team marginally better and worse at the same time. More grit, more culture, more leadership. They’re walking their walk so far. I didn’t watch many games after Christmas last season and the ones I did watch; I rarely got through. I’m looking forward to watching them this Fall regardless of winning or losing. That’s because I believe there will be more accountability and more effort on the ice.

Too early to grade the new management group. The real test will be the regular season. Want to see an improvement in the home record and the standings. Not looking for huge gains as a top-three pick would still be nice.

The ‘27/28 season is where the team needs to climb up the standings enough to at least not be last.

Effective management sets out a compelling vision employees and customers believe in. They also give everyone in the organization a clear line of sight into how they contribute toward the vision. A critical part in this is management must always act in a manner consistent with the vision.

It’s very early but the vision is easy to buy into. Fans like it and players will understand it.

We can debate the quality of every pick, trade, and signing. Time will tell how good the moves.

Top marks so far for setting a clear vision and the consistency of each move toward it.

I give the Canucks an A-.

I really liked all the moves the Canucks DID make, including the nice surprise of them getting a first round pick for Marcus Pettersson.

I downgrade them for the moves they did not make. I feel they should have been able to trade Jake DeBrusk during the trade madness leading up to draft day. The Canucks failed to capitalize on all the GMs that lost their senses and were handing out first round picks like candy.

Overall, I like the steady approach the new management has taken.

Draft – did quite well, though I was not sold on Malhotra. Granted, the picks I thought in this place fell down lower, so I could be wrong.

Trades – moving on from Höglander and Pettersson was good, although the return could have been better. A third rounder for Colorado is going to be pretty low, could we have not gotten Nashville’s? Maybe that is what the market dictated. For Pettersson, the first rounder was good, but what I did not like is that its so far out. Perhaps they can parlay that into something closer in the future. We really need to get more “darts” for the 2027 draft. I do like the Gallagher pick up.

Signings – I like adding character and toughness for sure. My concern is they probably only needed one veteran d-man, unless Schenn is just a PT player, which is quite likely.

Media – RJ has been fantastic. I would give him an A+ on this alone. RJ is so much more capable than Allvin! Sedins could be more front and centre though.

Overall, I give them a B.

Way too early to give them a grade yet. Certainly looking like an improvement over the last two utterly chaotic regimes though.

I give them 2 🌞🌞, one 👌, and deduct one 🦃.

Overall this is an above average grade.

I give them a D. I don’t care for the addition of the vets, in particular Gallagher and Schenn, as there are already enough vets to mentor the kids. While they did prioritize size at the draft, it seemed to me that the opportunity to draft a solid defenseman was passed over in favour of drafting the coach’s son. While drafting as high as they did, it doesn’t appear to me that there are any clear difference-makers in the bunch. Time will tell.

I guess there’s two interrelated parts to a grade so far: their success in the draft/trades/signings AND their success in starting to establish a healthy culture.

In the first, I’d echo Ragnarok above – probably about an -A (I could be talked into an A). Like the draft picks very much, signings all make sense, trades to the Rangers and Predators were good, but could have wished DeBrusk and (dare to dream) EP40 were successfully dealt.

For starting to establish a healthy culture – A+. Everything management have done and said so far just seems respectful, competent, and coming from a place of love for the Canucks. Coach, GM, co-presidents – all old Canucks – bringing in Luke Schenn for a one-year contract just cementing that idea of having people involved with rebuilding who have something invested in Vancouver and really want it to succeed.

Far too early to get this excited, I know (and this is going to be a long haul), but it really does feel like an important corner was turned here.

I am assigning a grade of A.

The draft was good. I am less impressed than the crowd. Pundits tend to give prospects NHL floors, and then a bunch of those NHL floors are not realized. It’s folly to grade a draft the day after it happened, IMO.

The trades have been an A. The Höglander trade was fine, and somewhat inconsequential. That they decided to move on was the best part of it. Bringing in Gallagher doesn’t excite me as much as others. I feel like his soft skills and work ethic has less impact when he is amongst 23 other guys. He is new to the team, so how quickly can he ascend to a position of leadership?

The Pettersson trade is A+. I love the future draft pick. I love that an NMC was moved.

The free agency work has been an A. Kudos for not re-signing a single UFA. The strategy of the signings is exemplary, and securing a replacement for MP was excellent adaptation. However, Schenn may not be an NHLer anymore, and Oleksiak will be playing higher in the lineup than he is suited for. Ryan suggested there is a vet for each young D, as in Hronek/Buium, Willander/Oleksiak, Schenn/EP or KK. If so, that is not very interchangeable, and not going to shelter the kids as much as I’d like. Having said that, the availability of slightly better players is thin.

I have concerns about culture change. We didn’t overhaul 23 players, so we don’t know if there are bad apples still in the basket. I don’t know that the additions of Oleksiak, Cotter, Schenn, and Gally can move the needle as much as we’d like when they will be mostly replacement level players.

I’d say at the moment he gets a B+. At least with Johnson, he does what he says he’s going to do. He wants character guys so he brings in guys like Schenn. He says he wants size, so he drafts guys who have size. You can see his plan in motion. This is a deliberate, carefully planned, rebuild. There’s a reason why he chose each of those players in the draft. It’s not about next season or the season after that, it’s all about future long-term success. When you don’t win the draft lottery and get that tier 1 elite franchise superstar player, then you pivot and draft the complementary pieces you need for when you do get that future superstar hopefully in the next draft or the one after. Canucks management are making plans to participate in multiple draft lotteries and I’m enjoying the ride so far.

I’m going to give the organization as a whole a B. The actual roster and culture moves they have made so far are an A for me. They have restored my faith that the current leadership actually means what they say, which is critical during a rebuild. I do have some concerns about the organization at large, that mostly relate to the resources being made available to RJ and the twins to pull this rebuild off.

Look, operating at the cap floor during a rebuild is fine. There’s no point in spending money if it’s not buying anything useful. However, it remains to be seen whether he’ll be allowed to spend more on payroll if it serves a purpose. More importantly, what kind of resources are being allocated towards expanding areas like player development, analytics, and scouting. The Canucks have clearly been deficient in these areas for a long time now, and I haven’t seen a lot of encouraging signs that this will be remedied moving forward. And there is still the matter of a practice facility, which has kind of turned into a running joke both in the community and in the NHL more broadly.

There’s been a narrative that money has been tight in recent years, with not much left over for other areas after meeting the cap spend. It may even be true-although owners are supposed to be willing to take losses, and then recover it when they eventually sell the franchise. Moving forward though, things are changing. All NHL teams are receiving an additional 15M/year annually from the new Canadian TV deal. In two years, there will be a new American TV deal, which will add at least 20M/year in new revenue for every team, and quite possibly more. And the expansion fee for a new Houston team at some point in the next three years will give every team an additional 60M one time cash injection. Overall, that’s a huge amount of new cash flow coming. Clearly, if you are running at cap floor, there is going to be a lot of spare cash. This team cannot plead poverty.

I want to see this team commit to a new practice facility, preferably one that doesn’t just steal a community ice surface somewhere. I want more resources directed into areas that will improve outcomes for selecting and developing the players who are going to lead this franchise in the future. Once I see that, I’ll feel pretty comfortable giving this franchise and its current executives top grades for their part in engineering a turnaround.

I am going with an A right now. Biggest reason is the club no longer looks bad airing the team’s laundry. The other reasons are the FA signings. I think the FAs will help get the rest of the young guys up to speed, add in the fact that the FAs know what is going on and buying into the plan is huge. The draft and trade of MP were fantastic in my opinion. Time will tell on the draft. The only reason they don’t get the plus is Jake DeBrusk. That being said if he is moved this offseason, I would happily hand the deserved plus to the new management team.

A.

If I was back in school this would be an early interim mark, not mid-term, not semester end and not final year end. A very solid start.

They are in the very early stages of putting a team together, one that for the foreseeable near future will lose more than it wins.

The important fact is they have started by putting players on the ice that will not be losers.

Losing for now is acceptable, being losers is not.