Why a Filip Hronek trade is not something the Canucks should be seriously considering

Sometimes, trade rumours really seem to crop up out of nowhere.

This past week, several different Canucks-related publications and podcasts floated the idea of Vancouver trading Filip Hronek at some point this offseason, presumably as part of their quest to upgrade their top-six forwards in general, and their top-six centres in particular.

It’s difficult to tell whether this is genuine scuttlebutt, or just a case of someone coming up with an idea and others parroting it.

Either way, however, real rumour or fake news, we feel fairly confident in stating that it would be a mistake to trade Hronek this summer – barring an offer truly too good to refuse.

The temptation is obvious enough. The Canucks need to improve their roster, and they’re unfortunately short on tradeable assets with which to do so. If the goal is still to build around Quinn Hughes, Elias Pettersson, and the collection of upcoming youth that includes the other Elias Pettersson, Tom Willander, and Jonathan Lekkerimäki, then Hronek definitely tops the list of ‘next-most-valuable.’

There’s also some immediacy to the discussion, with Hronek’s full no-movement clause set to kick in on July 1, 2025 and last until July 1, 2028 (after which it becomes a 15-team no-trade clause.

No doubt about it: Hronek would entail a massive return. He’s a fairly premium talent at the position of greatest scarcity in the NHL, that being right-shot defense. And if we’re talking available talent, Hronek is head-and-shoulders above the pack for the 2025 offseason.

In terms of UFAs available at RD, we’ve got Aaron Ekblad – who is likely to re-sign in Florida – and then the quality drops off considerably. You’ve got the 40-year-old Brent Burns, the recently-waived Dante Fabbro, the constantly-maligned Cody Ceci. And then a bunch of guys who are questionable as even ‘full-time NHLers.’

Suffice it to say that, if a team is looking to improve the right side of their blueline this summer, they’ll struggle mightily to do so via free agency.

The trade market should also be largely dry for quality RD. In fact, it’s tough to say that any right defenders of note are actively being shopped right now, save for some ancient options like Erik Karlsson. The majority of teams are looking to add at RD, not subtract.

And when supply is this low and demand is this high, there’s an obvious appeal to selling high, which the Canucks certainly could do with Hronek. But then, if most teams are looking to add a high-quality RD, doesn’t that also send a message about the value of hanging onto them?

Based on the market laid out above, it seems certain that if the Canucks were to trade Hronek, they wouldn’t be acquiring an adequate replacement this year.

What would that mean for the blueline? Well, it’d put the 35-year-old Tyler Myers back in the 1RD slot on the depth chart, a spot he’s never excelled in. Sure, Myers looked fine paired with Quinn Hughes at various points last season, but that was in part due to the buoying of the deeper blueline behind them.

Were Hronek to be traded, you’d instantly be counting on either Victor Mancini (31 NHL games) or Tom Willander (0 NHL games) to not just skate regular top-four minutes, but to do so behind an overtasked and overwhelmed Myers. Sure, both young defenders are promising, but demanding too much of them so early in their careers seems like a recipe for disaster.

It also seems wrongheaded regardless of the Canucks goals for 2025/26.

On the one hand, most believe that the front office is focused on Hughes and his future with the franchise. If convincing Hughes to stay is the priority mission, then becoming competitive again this year is probably a necessity, and the drive to improve the roster – and quickly – makes sense.

But in using Hronek as a trade chip to do so, the Canucks would remove a vital and direct support for Hughes himself. Does Hughes play alright with other partners? He does, it’s true. But he plays best with Hronek. Hughes himself has stated his outright preference for the pairing, and it’s no coincidence that Hughes’ rise to Norris-level stardom coincided with his finally being paired with a RD who could keep up with him.

Remember, from the moment Hughes arrived in Vancouver, finding him a blueline partner was the be-all and end-all. We can all recall the desperation with which some folks used to pine for Braden Schneider of the New York Rangers, for example.

Then, the Canucks acquired one in Hronek, and he’s panned out excellently.

Not only that, they got him under contract – and under contract before news broke of a ballooning cap ceiling. Hronek’s $7.25 million in compensation will see him enter the 2025/26 as the 31^st-highest-paid defender, leaguewide. By the end of the summer, he’ll have slid down into 2D money. Give it a few years, and he’ll be making what is considered ‘top-four’ salary. That means that, even as Hronek ages, his contract should continue to be seem as fair-or-better value. And forget about aging, anyway. Hronek is just 27.

In other words, he’s a player in his prime, and signed through his prime, at the most-valued position in the sport. Yes, that makes him a valuable trade asset. But it also just makes him a good asset.

The Canucks’ blueline looks like a strength right now. It might be their only genuine strength. But remove Hronek from the equation, and it goes back to being a question mark. Sure, that left side of Hughes, Marcus Pettersson, and Elias Pettersson would be just as strong. But they’d have to prop up a right side of Myers, a rookie, and a sophomore. A step-back in performance for 2025/26, 2026/27, and probably beyond would seem inevitable.

Tell us, what top-six centre, available for trade, would be worth that sacrifice? It’s hard to imagine anyway that would be returnable in a deal for Hronek.

One might even argue that Hronek is more valuable to the Canucks than he is to other teams. Other teams have to wonder how effective Hronek would be on a blueline without Hughes. The Canucks don’t, however. They’ve got Hughes, and they know Hronek works well with him. Everyone would value Hronek, but it’s the Canucks who should value him the most right now.

The best way to ensure the team is as competitive as possible while Hughes is still here is to hang on to his on-ice partner. There are other ways to improve the forward corps without robbing from the team’s only legitimate strength. The Canucks cannot afford a one-step-forward, one-step-back approach. On their timeline, they can only really afford steps forward.

And let’s imagine, for a dark second, that the attempts to extend Hughes fall flat, and that he departs the franchise sometime in the next two years. Well, at that point, the Canucks probably enter a rebuild. And, sure, then would be a good time to trade Hronek.

Yes, his NMC would have kicked in. But trading a player away from a rebuild is almost never an issue. And it’s doubtful that Hronek will have lost much value in the meantime – not with his contract set to age so well.

Were the team to enter a rebuild in a few years, the goal would obviously be to trade him for long-term assets, like prospects and picks. We imagine he’d return a haul and really kickstart a youth movement.

But if Hronek is traded now, it’s going to be for a more immediate talent up front. That’s an approach that seems destined for failure. The Canucks get better up front, get worse on the back-end, and it’s still tough to imagine them being any more competitive as a result.

Then, in a few years, they’re rebuilding anyway, and without the convenient asset of Hronek available to help them out with that.

We wouldn’t go as far as to call Hronek untouchable. The right offer could still definitely pry him loose. And we won’t go as far as to say that the time to trade him is not coming eventually.

But it really doesn’t seem like trading Hronek should be anywhere near the ‘Plan A’ that it was presented as by some sources this week. ‘Plan A’ should be to keep Hronek in the fold as the second-most important component on a strong Canucks blueline – and to find ways to build upon that strength, not trade away from it.