Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

ESQ
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1724
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by ESQ » Thu Apr 21, 2016 7:53 am

Could Benning get a 2nd rounder for Markstrom or Miller?

This might be the draft to make such a move. True, it could wind up costing 3-5 wins next season, but that wouldn't have been enough this year to get into the postseason anyway.

User avatar
micky107
CC Legend
Posts: 4631
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:27 am

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by micky107 » Thu Apr 21, 2016 8:59 am

ESQ wrote:Could Benning get a 2nd rounder for Markstrom or Miller?

This might be the draft to make such a move. True, it could wind up costing 3-5 wins next season, but that wouldn't have been enough this year to get into the postseason anyway.
I'd be a little hesitant to do that. True, he probably could get that but in the grand scheme of things, you don't want to fast track too much as both present goalie's contracts are up next year, plus we need to be more competitive next year if for no other purpose than to show our youth more meaningful games.
"evolution"

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9792
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Topper » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:22 am

Blob Mckenzie wrote:A better question might be how are you going to react when Benning gets the boot?
Benning, like every GM before him, will one day be fired, but for now, he is doing a very good job managing the team through a rebuild.

He has outlined a plan and stuck to it.

He has brought in credible vets to nurture the youth in the line up.

He has brought in an amazing number of rookies into the lineup that look to have credible NHL futures.

He has staggered the vets contracts to expire as the youth need to have their contracts re upped.

He has filled holes in the age of the lineup.

He has increased team speed.

He has managed the cap so that off season deals are available.

Your failure to recognize these achievements only make you look like a horses ass that has been ridden had and put away wet. (notice my lather comment above)
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
Lancer
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2163
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Lancer » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:39 am

ESQ wrote:Could Benning get a 2nd rounder for Markstrom or Miller?

This might be the draft to make such a move. True, it could wind up costing 3-5 wins next season, but that wouldn't have been enough this year to get into the postseason anyway.
Having Markstrom and Miller in Vancouver gives Demko insulation while he plays lots of games in the 'A' and gets adjusted to the pro game. It also gives Benning insurance if one of those goalies go down to stay competitive - remember they still haven't given up on making the playoffs next year (at least not publicly).

This looks to be Benning's plan, and I doubt he'll stray from it unless forced by either a) Miller saying he's had it and wants to leave this summer; or b) some club gives him an offer he can't refuse.

If the club is out of contention by the TDD next Spring however....
Love the Sport. Love the Team.

Hate the League.

User avatar
Lancer
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2163
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Lancer » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:46 am

RoyalDude wrote:So the Canucks had to be rebuilt due to 6 years of the Gillis drafting and developing gong show. In just two drafts we've landed Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, Boeser. Traded a 2nd for Baertschi, signed Stecher. Benning, you rebuilding genius you. Can you imagine what the genius could do in 6 drafts???
I would be one of the last to be a Gillis apologist, but in all fairness it was a different club at a different stage of competitiveness. That Gillis traded away top picks to get pieces to get the team over the top is understandable. It's what he got in return for those picks that was egregious - none of Ballard, Booth or any of the others made a difference while the team faded away.

This is where I believe Benning as a GM holds some promise: when he finds himself in Gillis' shoes managing a team who is in contention to win it all, there are better odds that what he gets in return for trades involving picks and prospects will actually put the team over the top. Not saying it's a shoe-in that will happen, but I have more faith in Benning than I did with Gillis.
Love the Sport. Love the Team.

Hate the League.

User avatar
Reefer2
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3872
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Reefer2 » Thu Apr 21, 2016 9:57 am

Lancer wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:So the Canucks had to be rebuilt due to 6 years of the Gillis drafting and developing gong show. In just two drafts we've landed Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, Boeser. Traded a 2nd for Baertschi, signed Stecher. Benning, you rebuilding genius you. Can you imagine what the genius could do in 6 drafts???
I would be one of the last to be a Gillis apologist, but in all fairness it was a different club at a different stage of competitiveness. That Gillis traded away top picks to get pieces to get the team over the top is understandable. It's what he got in return for those picks that was egregious - none of Ballard, Booth or any of the others made a difference while the team faded away.

This is where I believe Benning as a GM holds some promise: when he finds himself in Gillis' shoes managing a team who is in contention to win it all, there are better odds that what he gets in return for trades involving picks and prospects will actually put the team over the top. Not saying it's a shoe-in that will happen, but I have more faith in Benning than I did with Gillis.
Amen Lancer, different times and different requirements.

dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3048
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by dbr » Thu Apr 21, 2016 10:18 am

Lancer wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:So the Canucks had to be rebuilt due to 6 years of the Gillis drafting and developing gong show. In just two drafts we've landed Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, Boeser. Traded a 2nd for Baertschi, signed Stecher. Benning, you rebuilding genius you. Can you imagine what the genius could do in 6 drafts???
I would be one of the last to be a Gillis apologist, but in all fairness it was a different club at a different stage of competitiveness. That Gillis traded away top picks to get pieces to get the team over the top is understandable. It's what he got in return for those picks that was egregious - none of Ballard, Booth or any of the others made a difference while the team faded away.
Even then, Ballard was really the only bad value trade - we gave up more or less nothing for Booth except cap space, and even then a disastrous turn of events (the injuries to Booth both badly impacting his game and their timing making him ineligible for buyouts) was required to badly hurt the team.

Gillis came into a situation where the system had produced a crop of players who were ready to take the next step (Sedins into stardom, Kesler into the top tier of centers, Edler into a regular rotation top four guy, players like Hansen and Raymond and so on into the league) and almost nothing in the system behind them. He built around the guys he already had and spectacularly failed to build anything behind that.. the cupboards were already bare.

But RoyalDude is quite obviously trolling so I don't know what's to be gained starting a discussion off of his comments on the matter.
This is where I believe Benning as a GM holds some promise: when he finds himself in Gillis' shoes managing a team who is in contention to win it all, there are better odds that what he gets in return for trades involving picks and prospects will actually put the team over the top. Not saying it's a shoe-in that will happen, but I have more faith in Benning than I did with Gillis.
I don't, but I am coming around to the job that he's doing in its current context. I think worst case scenario, if he gets himself canned in a couple of years for failing to get results on the ice it looks like he'll have done a fine job restocking the cupboards - which this organization desperately needs right now.

damonberryman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by damonberryman » Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:24 am

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
SKYO wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote:
SKYO wrote:All the Canucks/JB haters are pissed at this news. :lol:

Benning haters dont' want nothing good to happen to the Canucks, damn shame, their hatred blinders are strong.
Who are these people you speak of , these Benning haters.... I think people want to progress and good management with a vision. It's more likely that there are Benning knob gobblers or in other words...... Trolls.
How are you going to be when this young team starts to turn it around? I'm not looking to hear about if it is or isn't, just a simple question of, are you going to change your tune if this young squad starts to get better in a year or two?, and *gasp* make the playoffs etc.
A better question might be how are you clowns going to react when Benning gets the boot? The endless ball licking will look pretty ridiculous when the team struggles for the next few years and the deigos patience runs out.
Normally I don't care but if you are going to call Italians a name it is 'dago' not 'diego'. Remember I grew up in East Van :D :D

Groovypippin
CC Veteran
Posts: 116
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:26 pm

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Groovypippin » Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:53 am

ESQ wrote:Could Benning get a 2nd rounder for Markstrom or Miller?

This might be the draft to make such a move. True, it could wind up costing 3-5 wins next season, but that wouldn't have been enough this year to get into the postseason anyway.
If the opportunity existed to extract decent value for Miller then I say go for it. There already exists a possibility that Miller may ask for a trade rather than waste his dwindling time in the NHL playing for a rebuilding team like ours. However, Demko is not ready for the NHL and Benning would most definitely have to ink a cheap, veteran backup for Markstrom.

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9792
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Topper » Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:00 pm

damonberryman wrote:Normally I don't care but if you are going to call Italians a name it is 'dago' not 'diego'. Remember I grew up in East Van :D :D
Diego habla espanol.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 11005
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:06 pm

Topper wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote:A better question might be how are you going to react when Benning gets the boot?
Benning, like every GM before him, will one day be fired, but for now, he is doing a very good job managing the team through a rebuild.

He has outlined a plan and stuck to it.

He has brought in credible vets to nurture the youth in the line up.

He has brought in an amazing number of rookies into the lineup that look to have credible NHL futures.

He has staggered the vets contracts to expire as the youth need to have their contracts re upped.

He has filled holes in the age of the lineup.

He has increased team speed.

He has managed the cap so that off season deals are available.

Your failure to recognize these achievements only make you look like a horses ass that has been ridden had and put away wet. (notice my lather comment above)
Yeah no he had mangled the cap not managed it.

The age gap crap is just that , crap.

Credible vets who are grossly overpaid.

The team was the slowest in the league. It would be impossible to make it any slower but they sure are smaller and softer.

As was said above the big group of rookies was shoehorned into the team. Hutton was the only one to make it on merit.
TRY TO FOCUS ON HOW MY ASS TASTES IN ONE YEAR

JMoose
CC Rookie
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:15 pm

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by JMoose » Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:16 pm

micky107 wrote:
ESQ wrote:Could Benning get a 2nd rounder for Markstrom or Miller?

This might be the draft to make such a move. True, it could wind up costing 3-5 wins next season, but that wouldn't have been enough this year to get into the postseason anyway.
I'd be a little hesitant to do that. True, he probably could get that but in the grand scheme of things, you don't want to fast track too much as both present goalie's contracts are up next year, plus we need to be more competitive next year if for no other purpose than to show our youth more meaningful games.
I think the only way that Markstrom should be traded is at the trade deadline next year and even then only if Demko is tearing it up at the AHL level and can step in behind Miller. Even then, not a great plan unless there is an older starter available to sign or acquire for cheap who will stay on for one more season to groom Demko into the starting role.

Who knows, maybe we get lucky and Demko is so good at camp and the pre-season that we are looking at our own version of Carey Price and he is NHL ready right off the hop.

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 13244
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by Hockey Widow » Thu Apr 21, 2016 2:35 pm

Me, I'd re-sign Markstrom 4-5 years, 3.5-4.5 million per. (preferably a 4 year extension giving us five years with him under contract.)

See how the Miller situation plays out this summer. I don't think he has high trade value, maybe a 2nd but that's it. If Miller is ok with playing out his contract I keep him. His value to the club in continuing to allow Markstrom to slowly work more games and in achieving the goal of making the playoffs is higher than a 2nd round pick. Unless you absolutely need his cap in FA that is.

Let Markstrom and Miller split the net. Let Demko play the full year in Utica without the pressure of being on the big club.

The only goalie, out of Markstrom or Miller with trade value on TDD will be Markstrom and it's too early to be contemplating moving him. Demko has yet to play a pro game. Demko could take 2-4 years to develop into a) an NHL back up and then b) an NHL starter.

Let Miller play out his contract. Even extend him 1-2 years if he wants it at around the 3-4 million range. If it's time to move on from him after this upcoming season then you just let him walk. We spent no assets in acquiring him so none lost, unless you count the Lack trade but since we got two picks for Lack who knows how that goes.

With Markstrom inked to be the starter after this upcoming season you then need to acquire an experienced back up on a 1-2 year deal. This allows Demko to keep developing in Utica, with hopefully a call up here and there if there are injuries. Rushing young goalies seldom works. If Markstrom shows he can deliver as a number 1 I'm fine with Demko doing his entire ELC years, three, in Utica.

Under my plan, Markstrom will have had two full years as the number one by the time Demko's ELC is up. He will have 2-3 more contract years with us still on his contract. A perfect storm to have Demko the official back up and another goalie controversy. But also the perfect time to begin the process of deciding which one to trade.

I just want to add, if we trade Miller this summer, either Bachman, who has one year left on his contract, or Cannata, who we would have to re-sign, could serve as a backup to Markstrom. The other, plays in Utica with Demko.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 9373
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by SKYO » Thu Apr 21, 2016 3:31 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Yeah no he had mangled the cap not managed it.

The age gap crap is just that , crap.

Credible vets who are grossly overpaid.

The team was the slowest in the league. It would be impossible to make it any slower but they sure are smaller and softer.

As was said above the big group of rookies was shoehorned into the team. Hutton was the only one to make it on merit.
How did he mangle the cap? if we let Hamhuis go we will have hella cap space.

Age gap is crap - nice analysis.

If you care about team speed and cap space that much, you should be an advocate for keeping hansen (our fastest skater) with a good cap hit, and want to rid the Canucks of Burrows, whose an elder in NHL years, and way past his prime plus takes $4.5M in cap space.

Rookies shoehorned into the team? did you even watch the preseason? McCann and Virtanen played great, while some of the older guys played not that great in Vey and Kenins.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 9373
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Canucks sign Thatcher Demko

Post by SKYO » Thu Apr 21, 2016 3:35 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:Me, I'd re-sign Markstrom 4-5 years, 3.5-4.5 million per. (preferably a 4 year extension giving us five years with him under contract.)

See how the Miller situation plays out this summer. I don't think he has high trade value, maybe a 2nd but that's it. If Miller is ok with playing out his contract I keep him. His value to the club in continuing to allow Markstrom to slowly work more games and in achieving the goal of making the playoffs is higher than a 2nd round pick. Unless you absolutely need his cap in FA that is.

Let Markstrom and Miller split the net. Let Demko play the full year in Utica without the pressure of being on the big club.
Nah, give Markstrom - Gibson's contract 3 years at $2+M per this July, with zero nmc/ntc, that way if/when Demko is ready to shine we can trade Marky and that cap friendly contract in a coupla years.

Miller stays unless wants out.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

Post Reply