Vancouver Canucks fans have been desperate for the organization to enter a proper rebuild for much of the last decade now.
In the Jim Benning era, when the Sedins were at the tail end of their careers, Vancouver kept one toe dipped into maintaining short-term competitiveness, even though it was painfully clear the organization needed to focus solely on the future. That resulted in splashy free-agent signings which became anchor contracts; failed age gap trades where the club bled draft picks for NHL-ready reclamation projects that never panned out; and a reluctance to acquire surplus draft capital, which left Vancouver’s prospect cupboards mostly empty when the first wave of young talent (Brock Boeser, Elias Pettersson, Quinn Hughes and Thatcher Demko) arrived in the NHL.
We don’t need to rehash the individual missteps that ultimately led the franchise to its current position — 32nd in the NHL standings and forced to trade superstar Quinn Hughes because he didn’t intend to re-sign in Vancouver. However, the Canucks must internalize the lesson that accelerating too quickly and chasing shortcuts to return to the playoffs can destroy a young, promising core’s ability to contend for the Stanley Cup in the long run.
The Hughes trade, which brought back Zeev Buium, Marco Rossi, Liam Öhgren and a first-round pick, netted the Canucks an impressive bounty of assets. More important than nailing the Hughes trade, though, is what plan comes next. Will the Canucks enter the kind of focused, patient rebuild that many fans have been clamouring for since the mid-2010s?
Canucks president of hockey operations Jim Rutherford dropped the “rebuild” word in the team’s news release following the Hughes blockbuster. He reiterated that posture during a call with a handful of reporters last Friday. And he recently told Postmedia’s Patrick Johnston that ownership is on board with a rebuild plan.
That messaging is music to fans’ ears, but the franchise’s actions will be more important than simply saying “rebuild.” What could the team’s next steps in this post-Hughes era look like? Let’s dive in.
How the Canucks are approaching a rebuild
After doing some digging, here are a few things I’ve been hearing about the club’s plan for the future.
- The Canucks aren’t going to tear it down to the studs. I don’t foresee a scorched-earth fire sale that mimics the path taken by the Chicago Blackhawks or the San Jose Sharks. Vancouver believes it can turn the team around within 2-3 years and would like to avoid a five-year or longer rebuild. The organization doesn’t think it’s starting from square one, given some of the young talent it has acquired through the draft and the Hughes trade return, particularly on the back end and in goal.
- I don’t sense the Canucks are eager to ship out their veterans with significant term remaining on their contracts. That would change if certain players tell management they don’t want to stick around on a team in transition. However, we’ve heard Conor Garland, Demko and Boeser say that they’re committed to staying in Vancouver even after Hughes’ departure. This isn’t to say that all of the older players with term remaining beyond this season will necessarily stay — players’ desires can change, and the Canucks could always receive an offer that knocks their socks off — but I wouldn’t bank on a mass exodus of non-UFA veterans.
- This part is more speculative: I wonder whether Vancouver’s blue-line veterans would be particularly off-limits. The Canucks are integrating three young defenders simultaneously: Buium, Tom Willander and Elias Pettersson. These three defenders have fewer than 125 games of combined NHL experience. The Canucks believe it’s essential to have high-quality veterans on the back end to support them. Crucially, the club views Filip Hronek, Marcus Pettersson and Tyler Myers not just as steady, established players for on-ice insulation, but also as high-character leaders well suited to mentoring the young defenders’ overall development. All three players also have full no-movement clauses, which further reduce the odds of them being traded.
- The Canucks will hold amateur scouting meetings in about three weeks. Their early feeling is that 2026 is shaping up to be a strong draft class, particularly at the top. Nobody wanted this season to go off the rails the way it already has, but picking high this summer is viewed by the organization as an important accelerant for a fast-tracked rebuild.
- Vancouver’s current rebuild plan isn’t predicated on intentionally bottoming out for, say, a three-year period and collecting lottery picks. However, it’s possible the Canucks could unintentionally finish near the bottom of the standings next season anyway. The Predators, for example, have resisted a full-blown rebuild under Barry Trotz and don’t believe in tanking, yet they’re 31st because they haven’t built a competitive enough roster.
- I think part of the reason the Canucks are bullish about turning the team around sooner rather than later is their immense faith in their player development system. In 2022, the front office beefed up this department — the Sedins moved from the front office to player development roles, while Mikael Samuelsson and Mike Komisarek were also hired. The front office has high expectations of its player development department and is relying on it to help maximize the under-23 talent currently in the pipeline.
- Some rebuilding teams place a single-minded focus on acquiring as many draft picks as possible. If and when the Canucks sell some of their pending free agents like Kiefer Sherwood, though, the club is more open-minded about what those trade returns could look like. Vancouver would welcome under-25 assets generally — whether it be picks, prospects, or NHL-ready talent in the early 20s age range.
Can an accelerated rebuild work?
Yes, the Canucks have a head start on a rebuild thanks to some of their existing under-25 talent, which was significantly bolstered by the Hughes trade. That said, it’s fair to have questions about how realistic a two- or three-year rebuild timeline actually is.
While Vancouver has potential building blocks on the blueline (Buium, Willander, Pettersson) and some intriguing up-and-coming goaltenders (2025 second-round pick Aleksei Medvedev, Nikita Tolopilo and Ty Young), the forward group is still desperately devoid of elite talent.
You could argue that this current Canucks team doesn’t have a single forward who would be a first-line player on a true Stanley Cup contender. Garland, Boeser and Jake DeBrusk would all be viewed as middle-six wingers on most playoff teams. Elias Pettersson is the closest player to fitting that bill. But even after accounting for his recent bounce-back, this is a player who’s scored 0.74 points per game over his last 125 games (a 60-point-per-82-games rate) dating back to the 2024 All-Star break. Barring a dramatic turnaround, Pettersson profiles as a low-end first-liner, a player who’d ideally be a premium second-line centre on a Cup-contending team today. This doesn’t even consider future aging — Pettersson will likely be well into his 30s by the time the next great Canucks team is built. With all these factors in mind, you can’t bank on him being a true first-liner for the next Cup-contending Canucks team.
In the prospect cupboards, the Canucks have some fascinating forward prospects, but none of them project as stars. Braeden Cootes was initially pegged as a future middle-six centre when he was drafted. His stock has unquestionably risen since then, but even if you upgrade his ceiling, you’d likely view him as the Bo Horvat equivalent of the next Canucks core rather than a franchise centre to build around.
Jonathan Lekkerimäki and Öhgren are solid winger prospects with legitimate middle-six upside, but they face long odds to become actual top-of-the-lineup difference-makers.
Let’s not forget how much star forward talent is required to contend for a Stanley Cup. The Florida Panthers won with three elite forwards in Aleksander Barkov, Matthew Tkachuk and Sam Reinhart leading the charge and were so deep that Brad Marchand was on their third line. The Colorado Avalanche, who are the best team in the NHL this season, have Nathan MacKinnon, Martin Necas, Valeri Nichushkin and an embarrassment of middle-six offensive riches. The Tampa Bay Lightning boast Nikita Kucherov, Brayden Point, Brandon Hagel and Jake Guentzel at the top of their lineup. The Dallas Stars are blessed with Mikko Rantanen, Jason Robertson, Wyatt Johnston and Roope Hintz.
The next-gen contenders in the West already have at least one, if not more, game-breaking star forwards in the fold, as well: the Sharks have Macklin Celebrini, Will Smith and Michael Misa; the Blackhawks have Connor Bedard; and the Ducks have Leo Carlsson, Cutter Gauthier and Beckett Sennecke.
I could go on and on with examples, but the point is you need 3-4 elite, game-breaking forwards (plus a deep middle-six, a high-end blue line and reliable goaltending) to become a true contender one day.
Is there a perfect scenario where the Canucks land Gavin McKenna or Ivar Stenberg this year, mine another elite forward in the 2027 draft, their current prospects/young players develop into better-than-expected impact NHLers, and they have the look of an up-and-coming team sooner than later? Absolutely. But that outcome banks on everything going right, which doesn’t often happen with this franchise. More likely, the Canucks have to be prepared for it to take longer than 2-3 years to accumulate the franchise-changing forwards and young core capable of meaningfully contending for a championship one day.
One year of picking in the top three or five almost certainly isn’t going to be enough, especially because the hit rate on these selections isn’t 100 percent. We’ve been spoiled lately by how quickly Matthew Schaefer, Celebrini, Bedard and Carlsson have become franchise-changing superstars. But when you look at other recent top-three picks (especially from 2020 to 2022), these players sometimes take time to reach their ceiling or become good players rather than elite ones.
Top-3 picks since 2019
YearNo.1No.2No.3
2025
Matthew Schaefer (NYI)
Michael Misa (SJS)
Anton Frondell (CHI)
2024
Macklin Celebrini (SJS)
Artyom Levshunov (CHI)
Beckett Sennecke (ANA)
2023
Connor Bedard (CHI)
Leo Carlsson (ANA)
Adam Fantilli (CBJ)
2022
Juraj Slafkovsky (MTL)
Simon Nemec (NJD)
Logan Cooley (UTA)
2021
Owen Power (BUF)
Matty Beniers (SEA)
Mason McTavish (ANA)
2020
Alexis Lafreniere (NYR)
Quinton Byfield (LAK)
Tim Stützle (OTT)
2019
Jack Hughes (NJD)
Kaapo Kakko (NYR)
Kirby Dach (CHI)
Top 5-10 picks represent your best chance of landing superstars, but they aren’t surefire bets. Because of that, a rebuilding team would ideally land several of them. The Avalanche, for example, had six top-10 picks between 2009 and 2017, leading to their 2022 Cup win. The Panthers had four top-three picks between 2010 and 2014. The Lightning had five top-10 picks from 2009 to 2013.
The top of this year’s draft is also heavy on defencemen, especially after McKenna and Stenberg. It’s possible that the best player available when the Canucks make their first selection next summer is a defender. You’ll happily draft a future star defenceman, but it would still delay the timeline for adding game-breaking forwards to the next core, which again, could make a fast turnaround dicey.
There’s nothing wrong with the Canucks being hopeful that a proper rebuild can be completed in less than 5-7 years. A fast-tracked two- or three-year timeline, though? It’s not impossible to pull off, but it does seem quite challenging to execute.
What happens if the turnaround appears to be taking longer than expected? Will they feel the pressure and brute-force the shorter timeline anyway, chasing short-term competitiveness that hurts its long-term Cup-contention ceiling? Or will they be flexible, adjust the timeline and keep making the disciplined, future-oriented moves that are most likely to result in an eventual Cup-contending team?
The answer to those questions could make or break the next decade of Canucks hockey.
