Canucks News N Notes 25-26

[Meds]

What I find interesting is you're ready to replace a 29 year old guy who has a history of missing games with a 30 year old who has a history of not playing enough. Until last year Lankinen's most was 37 and that was five years ago. Granted Saros had something to do with that but the point is at 30 he's just too much of an unknown.

It was just said Lankinen playing 51 games last year was 'overworked'…and you're ready to hand over the reigns to him??

The numbers from Demko I care about are 64 and 51 games played two of the past four seasons and averaging 42.5 over that span. That's decent for any goalie let alone an injury prone one (Lank never played more in one year until last season). One of the main reasons he gets injured is we never had good enough backups to support him and ease his load. Maybe now we do.

Look, I don't enjoy knocking Lankinen to make a point because I really do like the guy and am happy to have him here. I just can't place enough importance in what goaltending means to this team. Those of you who want Demmer out of here just might find out the hard way if/when you get your wish.

You can knock Lankinen all you want…..or don’t. You haven’t made a point.

If the point of the elite NHL starter is to win games, then that horse also needs to have the durability to be ridden. 64 games is too many for a goalie that you are also hoping to ride deep into the post-season. Ideally you want your backup playing more than 20 games rather than fewer.

A contending team has to have the goaltending quality we are talking about, but that team also has to possess 18 skaters that can win some games in front of the backup goalie so you can then cap your starter at 55 games and still be confident in a playoff spot…..after which your starter should expect to be ready for up to 28 in a row.

Currently, the Canucks are NOT a team that can be counted on to win enough games in front of any goaltender that doesn’t qualify as being elite. Therefore you need the Luongo or Brodeur type of elite that can start 70 games. However, only Brodeur has been a guy who could do that AND continue at that pace through the post-season.

Those 2 seasons you care about total up for 25% of his professional career campaigns. So 3 out of 4 seasons we can expect him to be unavailable or recovering and shaking rust off. Professional hockey players don’t tend to get more physically resilient and durable with age…..just the opposite.

You can try and convince yourself that Demko’s ailments are because he was overworked, however that’s a failure to think objectively. When an elite starter is expected to get 35 wins, but this elite starter can’t even play 35 games…..that’s not because of workload.

I believe it was UW that said that signing Demko and going with Silovs as a backup is a risk that you take if you are shooting for contention. And I agree with him. You risk him not getting injured because he is as good as he is when healthy, and you roll the dice that Silovs is a very affordable backup that over achieves his salary and then becomes Demko’s successor…..

BUT

They signed Lankinen to an extension, and unless they can bolster our top-6 forwards in free agency (now that the 15th OA is spent) trading Demko is the right move now because, even with Demko, this roster is going to have to be extremely lucky to even compete for a wild card spot, and if it isn’t looking like a contention window is about to open the chances of Hughes leaving in 2 seasons is high.

You go with Lankinen and Silovs this year and hope Silovs pushes Lankinen and takes his job, either this year or early next season. If he does than he becomes the top starter we need and his next contract times nicely with Lankinen’s reduced trade protection and the team moves forward.

Nobody WANTS Demko gone. It’s just where the team is at now. If JR/PA say “fuck the optics” and make the decision to trade Lankinen before his trade protection kicks in 48 hours from now, then yeah, keep Demko. But carrying 3 guys, or going with $11M - 13M in the crease (depending on Demmer’s ask) is not a doable thing.

[Cousin Strawberry]

Is t it already a foregone conclusion that Demko is resigning for $7/yr? I thought I heard it was waiting til july1 to be announced

[UWSaint]

I believe it was UW that said that signing Demko and going with Silovs as a backup is a risk that you take if you are shooting for contention. And I agree with him. You risk him not getting injured because he is as good as he is when healthy, and you roll the dice that Silovs is a very affordable backup that over achieves his salary and then becomes Demko’s successor…..

BUT

They signed Lankinen to an extension, [.... and] trad[ing] Lankinen before his trade protection kicks in 48 hours from now [or] carrying 3 guys, or going with $11M - 13M in the crease (depending on Demmer’s ask) is not a doable thing.

I've altered Mëds' post to respond to the bottom line: Mëds' conclusion is debatable but logical -- you probably don't trade a guy a few hours before protection kicks in after just signing the deal, and you ideally don't carry $11M-$13M in net, and you don't carry 3 goalies, ergo, move Demko -- he's the only one with any potential trade value (though with goalies, the market is weird because the buyers pool is always small -- its either quite a good return (consider Markstrom), or its soft).

This is sort of what grinds my gears about this management -- they create or contribute to the suboptimal "logical" solutions by creating or contributing to the conditions that lead to those solutions. The Boudreau fiasco. The Miller/Petey fiasco. With Boudreau, it almost felt like "we want to get rid of him because he's popular, but he won't be too popular if we ... and then its just something we had to do." (Not that BB is blameless; and not that the team wasn't also to blame for that start). Same with Demko -- they had doubts because of the health, they know he's popular, so they create conditions where rational minds come to Mëds' conclusion.

Of course, you can fight Med's premises -- you *can* sign a guy and trade him before a NMC -- that's not terribly unusual and no one has their panties in a bunch if EP40 is dealt in the next 3 days. They might not like whatever deal comes, but they aren't going to object on some kind of moral ground. There's differences here, for sure, but that moral debate is only theoretical in the world we are in--where the contract isn't really marketable because it is too much for too long with too many protections for the player in question.

But maybe you take the hit -- you carry Demko-Lankinen, their $11-$13M cap hit (starting next year), and you trade Silovs for pennies. It *is* a doable thing (strictly speaking) -- there is cap space (as a function of math) and teams have spent much more than that as a percentage of total cap in order to have a great goalie (or who they think is a great goalie). It is suboptimal, but could be considered logical towards the ends of competitiveness insofar as the odds of Demko being healthy and well above average -- which is just a bit less than Demko being healthy -- are likely higher than Silovs becoming well above average.

And I bet it is what they do -- run with Demko and Lankinen, unless getting the info out about negotiating a contract with Demko is all theater to help the perception of moving him. "We tried, we just couldn't get anything done so we had to move on from him. We know the return isn't as much as we would have liked, but we didn't want to lose him for nothing...."

[Strangelove]

Re-sign Demmer and dump Lankinen.

I'm on record for hating Lanky's contract from the moment it was signed.

[Strangelove]

So they failed as far as finding a 15th overall+ trade for a centre.

Feels like Plan B must be to mega-overpay one of those old UFA centres on a 4 year deal.

Hey, maybe Cootes can replace whichever old coot that is by then.

[Cousin Strawberry]

Canucks just acquired a 6'4 220 lb Russian center named Ilya Safonov. Apparently they'll try and lure him over to play where Chicago couldn't.

Sounds like a bottom 6 add at best. Not much of a scorer but good on the pk

[UWSaint]

So they failed as far as finding a 15th overall+ trade for a centre.

Feels like Plan B must be to mega-overpay one of those old UFA centres on a 4 year deal.

Hey, maybe Cootes can replace whichever old coot that is by then.

I think they are still working at it. But I am guessing its Granlund -- 3/7M or 4/6M.

[Chef Boi RD]

The ask on Rossi is too high. I could see a low cost Granlund type landing here.

The Islanders are apparently shopping Sorokin. Seems like they want to tank for Mckenna next season.

[Strangelove]

So they failed as far as finding a 15th overall+ trade for a centre.

Feels like Plan B must be to mega-overpay one of those old UFA centres on a 4 year deal.

Hey, maybe Cootes can replace whichever old coot that is by then.

I think they are still working at it. But I am guessing its Granlund -- 3/7M or 4/6M.

Yeah, I was thinking Granlund at around those numbers... or more.

"Sea of Granlunds"

[Blob Mckenzie]

I'm curious if the Canucks would trade Braeden Cootes for Marco Rossi?

I'm curious if they will pay market rate for Rossi

I'm curious if Danny has a decent hybrid

I'm curious if Mëds is really only 6 ft 11

I'm curious how this Mcdonalds is going to impact my toilet

I'm curious if the Dude still taps Giilian Guess.



Hang in there Wids

[Cousin Strawberry]

My current situation is an indica dominant hybrid that is quite decent

[Picker of Cherries]

Re-sign Demmer and dump Lankinen.

I'm on record for hating Lanky's contract from the moment it was signed.

I’m with Doc. If they could move on from Lankinen’s contract mistake, and end up with Demko and Silovs, that’d be a tidy piece of business, sadly I think trading Silovs will be management’s next mistake, even though he’s the one goalie they should hang on to.

[Strangelove]

Yeah, they'll prolly trade Silovs...

[Chef Boi RD]

What Silovs returns in a trade is an absolute mystery.

[Strangelove]

Canucks just acquired a 6'4 220 lb Russian center named Ilya Safonov. Apparently they'll try and lure him over to play where Chicago couldn't.

Sounds like a bottom 6 add at best. Not much of a scorer but good on the pk

For futures.

LOL, Canucks and Rooskies amirite?