A Brutal Start to the Rebuild for the Vancouver Canucks

Most of my sports allegiances make enough sense to the people around me. The one that makes the least sense? Vancouver Canucks hockey. The story is simple enough: I fell in love with Pavel Bure in the aftermath of the 1994 Stanley Cup Finals, fueled by the arrival of a Super Nintendo and NHL94 into the formative years of my childhood. My fandom only grew from there, continuing through the ill-fated arrival of Mark Messier, the once-in-a-lifetime maneuvering at the 1999 Draft that brought the Sedin twins to Vancouver, the West Coast Express era, the Todd Bertuzzi-Steve Moore incident, the Luongo trade, the run of Blackhawks-Canucks series, the slow dismantling of the President's Trophy teams into a middling club, the out-of-nowhere 2024 playoff run, and 10 Canucks games in person (seven in Detroit, three in Chicago) with probably thousands experienced between internet radio and, eventually, TV (thanks, ESPN+).

This year was something else. It seems like a distant memory, but the team actually got off to a solid start, finding themselves at 9-9-2 at the season's quarter pole. From there, the season tumbled into the dumpster in spectacular fashion: the club shipped superstar D Quinn Hughes to Minnesota for a solid return including projected top D Zeev Buium, 2C Marco Rossi, former 1st rounder F Liam Ohgren, and a late 2026 1st rounder, going 16-40-6 over their last 62 games. In an NHL landscape dominated by parity, the Canucks landed with just 58 points, 14 points behind 31st place Chicago.

What was it all for? As it turns out, not much!

The Canucks lost the lottery, watching 2016 lottery winner Toronto (Auston Matthews) and 2024 lottery winner San Jose (Macklin Celebrini) jump them despite considerably longer odds. It is particularly galling in Toronto's case: participating in their first lottery since 2016, Toronto will secure the services of Yukon native and former Penn State star Gavin McKenna. San Jose is at the end of their highly successful rebuild, once that will be finished off by the arrival of Swedish sensation Ivar Stenberg. Unfortunately for the Canucks, the drop-off from #2 to #3 is massive.

My brother lamented that the Blackhawks also dropped a pair of spots relative to their place in the standings. I found it difficult to share much sympathy: the Blackhawks have enjoyed five distinct lottery successes since the institution of the lottery system in 1995. While some wins weren't particularly meaningful -- I'm looking at you, 1999, when the Blackhawks jumped from 8th to 4th to select Pavel Brendl! -- they jumped from 5th to 1st for Patrick Kane in 2007 and 3rd to 1st for Connor Bedard in 2023. The Blackhawks have already enjoyed a lifetime of lottery success.

I know that the Canucks haven't. But this sent me down a rabbit hole: just how poorly has the Draft lottery gone for the Canucks? So here goes. This post will now morph into a history of the Canucks in the NHL  Draft lottery. If you're also a Canucks fan, avert your eyes! The list will show the Canucks' odds of obtaining the #1 overall pick along with the position of their odds in parentheses.

• 2026: 25.5% odds of staying at #1 (1st)
• Result: Dropped two spots to #3
• 2025: 1.1% odds of moving up to #5 (15th)
• Result: stayed at #15
• 2024: not a participant
• 2023: 3.0% odds of moving up to #1 (11th)
• Result: stayed at #11
• 2022: 1.1% odds of moving up to #5 (15th)
• Result: stayed at #15
• 2021: 5.4% odds of moving up to #1 (9th)
• Result: stayed at #9
• 2020: not a participant
• 2019: 5.0% odds of moving up to #1 (9th)
• Result: Dropped one spot to #10
• 2018: 7.5% odds of moving up to #1 (6th)
• Result: Dropped one spot to #7
• 2017: 12.1% odds of #1 (2nd)
• Result: Dropped three spots to #5
• 2016: 11.5% odds of #1 (3rd)
• Result: Dropped two spots to #5
• 2015: not a participant
• 2014: 6.2% odds of #1 (6th)
• Result: stayed at #6
• 2013: not a participant
• 2012: not a participant
• 2011: not a participant
• 2010: not a participant
• 2009: not a participant
• 2008: 2.1% odds of moving up to #1 (10th)
• Result: stayed at #10
• 2007: not a participant
• 2006: 0.5% odds of moving up to #1 (14th)
• Result: stayed at #14
• 2005: 2.1% odds of #1 (15th)
• Result: Jumped to #10
• The 2005 lottery was bonkers following the lockout. Four teams had 6.3% odds of #1, 10 teams had 4.2% odds, and the remaining 16 teams had 2.1% odds. So while the Canucks did climb from a 16-way tie for the 15th-best odds, not even the NHL considers this a win due to the largely flat structure of the lottery.
• 2004: not a participant
• 2003: not a participant
• 2002: not a participant
• 2001: not a participant
• 2000: unknown odds of moving up to #1 (11th)
• Result: stayed at #11
• 1999: 16.9% odds of moving up to #1 (2nd)
• Result: Dropped one spot to #3
• 1998: 10.8% odds of #1 (4th)
• Result: stayed at #4
• 1997: 0.5% odds of moving up to #1 (10th)
• Result: stayed at #10
• 1996: not a participant
• 1995: not a participant

There it is. Across 32 lotteries, the Canucks have "enjoyed" the following results:

• Jumped: 1 (sort of -- see 2005 above)
• Stayed: 10
• Dropped one spot: 3
• Dropped two spots: 2
• Dropped three spots: 1
• Not a participant: 15

OK. The results aren't great! But are they really that bad? Yes. Yes they are, for a few reasons:

1. The number of "not a participant" years above is deceptively bad. While the NHL currently features 32 teams with 16 playoff squads and 16 Draft lottery participants, that wasn't the case in the early days of the lottery. When the lottery was first instituted, only 10 of the NHL's 26 teams participated. 61.5% of the NHL teams made the playoffs back then. Given the impact of league expansion in the following years, you'd expect the Canucks to have made the playoffs in roughly 18 of the last 32 years. 15 is below average.
2. The one time that the Canucks "jumped" was so weird that the league doesn't even count it as a jump. Such is life in the post-lockout world.
3. The Canucks have never jumped in the 16 non-lockout lotteries, but they have dropped six times.
4. 1999, in particular, sticks out like a sore thumb. Brian Burke expertly navigated the Draft that year, making deals to acquire the #4 pick, turning it into the #1 pick, and ultimately settling with the #2 pick alongside the club's own #3 pick to nab both Sedin twins. But how much lower would the cost have been to the franchise had they landed at #2 or even #1 with their own pick? In the end, the cost to get #2 in 1999 and #67 in 2000 was (i) 24-year-old top-pairing defenseman Bryan McCabe, (ii) the #11 overall pick in the 2000 Draft, (iii) #75 in 1999, and (iv) #88 in 1999.
5. Nothing above hurts as much as this year. Falling to #3 in a two-player Draft likely sets the Canucks rebuild back at least another year. It's a brutal gut punch.

OK, that's enough for now. Tonight was a bad night for the Canucks. A really bad night. Instead of the rebuild getting turbocharged with a McKenna- or Stenberg-shaped puzzle piece entering the picture, the Canucks are tasked with building this thing up in the image of the Golden State Warriors, turning a bunch of non-elite picks into a somehow-elite roster. It's going to be seriously tough for whoever ends up helming the Canucks ship.