[Brock Boeser | #6 | RW]

Wouldn't surpise me one bit. I think i said that when we drafted him

This dude^^^^...he's some kind of special, ain't he?

[Thatcher Demko | #35 | G]

Ok here is where I am weird.

 

I said this about Tryamkin as well.

 

Demko entered in to an arrangement in college where he'd get to play if he studied.  That is the single most important thing in his life.  Not hockey, not studying tapes.  Learning.  He entered in to that obligation when he took his scholarships and I would think less of him as a eprson and as a player if he bailed on those obligations.

 

Tryamkin is the same way, he signed a contract that he COULD possibly opt out of but hasn't.  Even though CDC members are screaming to bring him over he's playing it out.  

 

I respect that, I for one do not want a player that simply bails on his team/obligations or self when they've decided the grass is greener elsewhere.  We had one of those named Kesler.  I don't want to have to watch a team where once the athletes have had enough they just opt out.

 

We've no need to rush him in, we can groom him well.  So let's do that, because at days end a team is only as strong as its weakest link right?  Well what if instead of breaking that important link just gave up.  Would you want that on your team?  He can come over when he graduates, I am good with that

Nothing weird about holding people/hockey players to commitments they have made.  The world would be a better place if everyone honored their commitments; so I'm with you on this all the way.  

With that being said, I wouldn't hold it against Demko if he decided to leave BC a year before fulfilling his four year commitment.  No matter which way Demko goes, he's a fine goalie prospect who has a bright future as a pro hockey goalie...so another year in college to fulfill his academic aspirations and his commitment to the BC hockey program isn't going to make or break him, or have a huge impact on the Canucks goalie succession plan.

 

 

[Thatcher Demko | #35 | G]

94 starts after 3 years isn't bad.  But can he do 94 starts over 2 seasons, 3 sometimes 4 games a week against the best in the world?

 

Even at the most intense the NCAA isn't nearly as rigorous as even the AHL and while the level of competition is still professional (pro am) it's still not the intense day in day out grind of the AHL/NHL which is where we'll see him where we need to to know what we'll have 

 

I still think the idea is to see him finish college, play 2 seasons in the AHL before coming to the bigs.  If Marky pans out we won't need to rush him at all which is what we'd need optimally.

I get what you're saying and if Markstrom turns out to be the goalie that everyone is hoping for then the Canucks organization will have the luxury of bringing in Demko slowly and methodically.  

Though I recognize that the difference is only one year, wouldn't you want answers to your questions about Demko sooner than later?  I'm of the opinion that Demko, if he keeps playing the way he's played this season, won't have much more to prove at the NCAA level, and that his next test at the AHL level should come sooner than later.

I'm also of the opinion that certain players (not all) are better served by being fast-tracked.  Just speculation on my part, but Demko may be one of those guys.  And with guys like this, it may hurt them more by keeping them in an environment where they are so dominant (not saying Demko is this) that they may develop some bad habits.  Personally, I would prefer to see Demko being brought along under the watchful eye of Rollie Melanson/Dan Cloutier sooner than later (by sooner I mean 2016 vs. 2017).

IMO, Demko being in college this year as he comes back from his hip surgery is definitely the right place for him to be.

[Thatcher Demko | #35 | G]

24 if I recall, but I am more concerned with seeing if Demko can dominate college in the same manner and break that 15 shutout mark before moving in to the AHL

Hippy - wouldn't you say two years (three after this season) where he's had 59 starts, with GAA of 2.21 and SPCT. of 0.923, plus WJC where he was the best player on the US Team a show of domination at the levels he's played?  It's conceivable he'll get another 35 starts this season, so over a three year period, that 94 starts...can't get anymore than that in NCAA (hopefully add in a few playoff games for him).

If Demko signs after his junior season, he'll be 20 at camp (20/21 through his first pro season)...IMO, that puts him on the fast track for NHL debut at 22, which, if he hasn't super-novaed and flared out, puts him and the Canucks in a solid position for years to come (not saying he'll start a lot of games in the NHL as a 22 year old, but I've always liked the idea of having lots of young players apprenticing as back ups or while being "sheltered").  

All this is to say is that IMO, Demko becoming a pro as a 20 year old and getting lots of playing time in the AHL as a 20/21/22 year old  under the watchful eye of Rollie the Goalie would be good for his development and for the Canucks organization.

[Thatcher Demko | #35 | G]

Canucks News ‏@CanucksNow  3m3 minutes ago

#Canucks prospect Thatcher Demko posted his 4th shutout yesterday for Boston College. He is 6-1-0 with a 0.964 SV% and 0.86 GAA.

Maybe the first time I have seen save pct. higher than GAA.  Good on Demko for his great start to the season...one more season of NCAA...one season in AHL...into the bigs in 2017-2018?  Is that the succession plan the JB was talking about?

 

[Thatcher Demko | #35 | G]

I made a mistake by engaging Gstank29. Feeding a troll doesn't do anything. Back to ignoring him. 

Bomber vs. G-stink...epic battle.  Who wins?  Bomber now trying to take the back roads...that's funny.

Seeing how there's no winner, appears as if we have two losers.  Yup...that's about right.

[Anton Rodin | RW/LW]

Strength is part of that though. If you're not strong enough to battle along the boards or finish your checks, you're gonna get tossed around and are more likely to get injured.

Same thing with his concussion. Reaching for pucks cause he's afraid to take a hit.

Don't kid yourself about Rodin. One of his attributes even as a 20 year old was that he was willing to compete. Kid wasn't afraid of getting hit. So yah, strength was an issue. His willingness to compete while being light and not strong enough were the cause for his injuries. Not because he was "afraid" to take a hit. Quite the opposite and a big difference.

[Anton Rodin | RW/LW]

Benning won't bring him back, bank on it.

Why? He's the guy, when in Boston, that championed the drafting of Alex Khokhlachev. Similar type players.

[Anton Rodin | RW/LW]

Worth a shot, especially if Jensen doesn't pan out.

Rodin's problem was always his strength. If he's worked on that, he definitely has the skill to be an NHLer.

Though that may have been part of the problem, the real issue with Rodin was that he couldn't stay healthy. From what I remember, separated shoulder and concussion slowed down his progress...now that he's had a few years of good health and grown a little more, he's shown to be productive in the SHL. I'd take a flyer on Rodin.

[Sven Baertschi | LW]

Grenier got a one way, why shouldn't Sven?

No brainer.

A little bit of fact checking will do you good. But I agree, it's a no brainer to get Sven signed to a one way deal. One year one way for $700K. That would be a fair deal for both sides.