The Canucks’ intensity and competitiveness is starting to move in the right direction.

VANCOUVER – The rebuilding period for the Vancouver Canucks, or how long it takes for the organization to start winning again, will be determined in part by how quickly and firmly they establish new standards and a better culture than they have had for the past decade.

Of course, talent is the most important thing. The Canucks must continue to accumulate talented prospects and develop them into National Hockey League players. But talent hasn’t been this team’s biggest problem in recent years.

They need a better culture, or at least one they can work with every day. You don’t have to wait years to do that.

In this respect, the degree to which the worst team in the league has dug in and fought in recent games is a small step in the right direction.

On Monday, they lost 2-0 to an aggressive, heavy-handed Ottawa Senators team that has struggled through the first half of the season but is 9-1-2 since Jan. 25. Brady Tkachuk scored into an empty net and Ridly Greig’s other goal for the Senators in the second period should not have counted if the referees had actually read the NHL’s Rule 79 as a hand pass.

The Canucks have three points out of four in back-to-back weekend away games against the Winnipeg Jets (a 3-2 overtime loss on Saturday) and the Chicago Blackhawks (a 6-3 trade deadline win on Friday).

There’s a chance that none of these opponents will actually make the playoffs, so it’s not like the Canucks are facing a Stanley Cup heavyweight.

But they are matched and competing tenaciously, which is more than has happened for most of this winter, when the Canucks have lost by three or more goals in regulation 13 times during a dismal stretch of two wins in 23 games.

“I think the competition was great,” said goalkeeper Kevin Lankinen, who achieved his second consecutive A grade performance. “Other guys are taking on bigger roles. I know it’s not always easy to do that, but it’s great to see guys taking initiative and showing leadership both in the room and on the ice, so it’s fun to watch.”

Of course, these three games happened after the deadline. The Canucks’ trades of veterans Tyler Myers, Conor Garland and David Kampf were preceded by trades for Quinn Hughes and Kiefer Sherwood.

It’s a different team now and the atmosphere is different.

“I think this is a great opportunity for our young players,” said 22-year-old rookie winger Liam Ohgren. “They’ve shown they believe in us and they’ve played us a lot, so it’s good for all of us. It’s good for our future and all that. And yes, it gives us a bit of a confidence boost.”

“Things are getting a lot better,” Marco Rossi, another recent acquirer, said of the level of competition. “Especially in the last few games we have played better. There are some areas we need to improve on, but overall I think we are playing better. We can focus on ourselves.”

With half the roster caught up in a whirlwind of trade speculation, the focus before the deadline was a bit distracting. The timing of the Canucks’ uptick in focus and intensity and the growth of their young players is no mystery.

“That’s usually what happens when the deadline passes,” Lankinen said. “Obviously we’ve lost a lot of good people. It’s hard to see. People who have been in this for a long time and a few people who haven’t been (here) that long. But all in all, they’re great human beings and obviously we’re going to miss those guys. But that’s how business goes. We’re going to turn the page and focus on what we have here. I really like the young talent we have.”

But this talent needs to be developed. The competitiveness they demonstrate can give them a platform to get better.

Against the Senators, the Canucks made just 16 shots, and none during four minutes of third-period power play time when Vancouver attempted just four shots. Three missed the net and one was blocked.

The Canucks’ power play is just 5-for-48 (10.4%) over the past two months. The only first-team player missing since the start of the season was their best player, Hughes. Vancouver needs to do better at 5-on-4. The Canuck power play will need to find ways to make a difference when possible, like in Monday’s game, especially since this young team will be challenged to create even scoring opportunities.

“We just didn’t execute,” Rossi said of the third period failure. “It doesn’t matter whether it was in the (offensive) zone or the break zone, we made too many mistakes.

“Sometimes, you try too much, and I don’t think that helps the team. We just have to keep it simple, just put the puck on the net. That would probably make the PKs more passive and then open up other things. But we try to do the (nice) things first and try other things at the end. But it doesn’t work.”

But the Canucks’ penalty killing was good. It thwarted the Senators’ eighth-ranked power play on four opportunities.

Critically, one of the kills came after Vancouver coach Adam Foote unsuccessfully challenged Greig’s fortuitous goal for Ottawa at 10:11 of the period.

Artem Zub’s fluttering point shot was instinctively taken by teammate Shane Pinto. Shane Pinto brought his glove forward as the puck hit his face, ricocheted off Greig at the right angle and went unchecked into the slot alone.

Foote was challenged for missing a break on a hand pass. The NHL rulebook states that intent to make a hand pass is not required to be whistled and that play must be stopped if the puck leaves a player’s glove and “allows his team to gain the advantage.”

We believe the go-ahead goal in a 0-0 game favors the Senators. But we also know there’s no such thing as a “clear” rule in the NHL, and referees Kyle Rehman and Corey Syvret disagreed with Foote.

“Well, I was told by the referee (Rehman) that if a guy saves his face, it’s a goal,” Foote explained to reporters. “I told him that’s not in the rule book. It clearly doesn’t say that in 79.1. You know, because the situation room (in Toronto) came out so quickly and gave me a statement… it was inconclusive. But obviously in the video, he was saving his face. But the weirdest thing is that the same play happened in December in Tampa, and the same play was called a no-goal by the same referee.

“For me, it bothered me because if they were wrong and we got a penalty, it could have been 2-0. You can’t be wrong. There was some debate about this rule on the hockey show and I think it may change in the future, but the way it was written (in the rule book), it had to be overruled.”

Yes, shocking, NHL. shocking.

But if the Canucks hadn’t scored a goal of their own, Vancouver’s win would have been the same.

Still, harsh rule interpretations are solely responsible for the NHL’s tumble to the bottom, but this season it’s felt like the piling on was against a Canuck team that did just about everything against them.

At least their intensity and competitiveness is starting to move in the right direction.

It was their fifth scoreless loss of the season and fourth loss at Rogers Arena, opening an eight-game homestand. The Canucks’ next game is Thursday against the Nashville Predators.