Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

theo5789

Members
  • Posts

    10,596
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by theo5789

  1. I agree that Markstrom's value is high right now, but he's our clear cut starter right now. Demko has played a total of 10 NHL games and hasn't been lights out in them. We don't know how Demko will fare in the next couple of years (look how long Marky took before hopefully finding a new level to his game). Again we don't know two years down the road if there are more players of value that may be exposed. We also don't know if the market will be flooded with decent goaltending that may ours won't be appealing. Maybe we strategically don't protect Markstrom if his value is declining in a couple of years and his contract isn't worth taking. There are many ways around this where we don't have to rush to move a goalie. Personally I think if we lose one, then we lose one, as long as we protect the best goalie to carry us forward. If we feel comfortable in a position that we won't lose someone of too much value, then surely there will be a team out there that may want to look to add a goalie and we make a swap that helps both clubs strengthen their team and protect their assets. The ED is still a couple of years away and we will lose (only) one player regardless, so why mess with the build over this?
  2. The question is what are we willing to give up if we want to make it happen and if the other teams see it as enough value to give up a piece that fills our needs. We certainly would have to give up value and I would love to add Risto, but I can't really pinpoint what they would be looking for to take them to the next level. Ceci just seems more likely as Ottawa might not want to pay him and we can offer cheaper replaceable options.
  3. He's a top 6 or bust type of guy IMO. I think he will be a top 6 forward for sure, but he may not achieve that elite status. I think he's become a "brand name", but there are guys in the draft that aren't far off from him in the top 7 or 8. Basically I feel like he will be a Nico Hischier type of player who I would not be upset using a 1st overall pick as he would be a surefire NHLer, but there could be EP potential somewhere else in the draft.
  4. Perhaps if Spencer Knight is available around the Carolina pick, then we offer Demko for the pick to nab him. At least that way Carolina gets a goalie that is further along in development to help with their window that they are looking at now and we get a goalie that should hopefully be ready to take over when Markstrom is done (after his extension). Hopefully we can get more out of the deal as well, but I'm not sure if Demko is at a 1st round pick value quite yet as he's still quite unproven at the NHL level. For comparison sake, Schnieder had basically a full season of games under his belt with incredible numbers before landing a 10th overall pick. Demko has played 10 NHL games so far with very average numbers. Demko will need a pretty good season next year (playing at least 30 games) to up his value to nab what you're looking for and if that happens, we are in a position where we need to decide if we're actually better off keeping him and moving Marky instead (who would have lesser value as a pending UFA).
  5. This is probably true and because of this, he's going to taking the biggest contract (term and cap) that he's going to possibly get before he declines. A 4 year term may be reasonable for us, but it won't be for him. I imagine he's looking at 6 years minimum and potentially in the 7 million dollar range (plus likely some trade/movement clause) if there's a bidding war.
  6. I have a harder time believing that Ristolainen would be available, at least for a price that would make sense for us, but I do think Ceci would be a reasonable add. Carolina's D will be harder to pry as they were looking for a Nylander (pre-ridiculous contract) return.
  7. Aside from Byram, I can pretty much agree with this. I wouldn't mind Soderstrom as he would fill a positional need, but he doesn't strike me as a #10 pick and would be a bit of a reach to simply fill a position. I think we can find another player of his caliber in the 2nd or 3rd round anyway. Edit: Just realized you said pretty much the same thing earlier!
  8. It depends on what other goalies are on the market as well when the ED comes around. Seattle might pick a different player on our team altogether if their goalie situation is set and we keep both. Either way whoever is exposed will be our "backup" and if that's all we are losing in the ED, then I would say we would come out relatively unscathed. Markstrom and Demko have 2 years to fight to be protected. Personally I think it's too big of a gamble to trade either unless we get a significant piece in return, but that only pushes out another decent potential player to be exposed in a different position. Right now, Demko is unproven, but has potential to be a #1, so he is certainly moveable but not at the highest potential trade value. If we move Markstrom before Demko is ready, then we could be resetting back the rebuild and maybe even taking a step backwards if Demko doesn't find the next level in a hurry. We shouldn't be building around the ED and just let it play out as we will lose one decent player no matter what, so just take the loss and move on.
  9. Is he eligible to play? This is more interesting news if Tryamkin does return next season.
  10. I'm not opposed to Myers and think he's a serviceable top 4 dman. I just don't think he will be worth his UFA price tag, but if he could be had for a reasonable contract then sure. Don't forget that he's playing with a much better defense core, so he would likely be more exposed here given a bigger role expected of him considering what he would likely command.
  11. Looks decent, but I'd like room for Woo. Perhaps that could be accomplished if Tryamkin doesn't return though. I think I'd want someone a bit more effective than Myers for what his potential price may be.
  12. Honestly I don't mind the purpose of the lottery system, which is to discourage tanking. It's so teams don't intentionally lose to go after that too pick, just imagine it as a paying fan. Sure, the fans just don't have to attend those games, but that's bad for business. It's better to keep teams competitive as best they can so at least the paying fan can still enjoy their home team putting in an effort and still being rewarded with a player to hopefully push you over the playoff hump the next year and beyond. However with that said, it's the trend that's been set that I'm not a fan of. I can't say if it's "rigged" or not, but 9 of the 12 lottery winning picks have gone out East including all 1st overalls (after the West got 5 of the last 6 1st overalls with Edmonton alone getting 4 of them). When the bottom team was an Eastern team, they beat the odds of dropping and when the West owned the best odds for 1st, they dropped right out of the top 3. For something that is suppose to be "random" or a lottery, the results seem quite skewed. It would seem as if the league knows something to this effect this year as the West looked competitive down to the end whereas the East tanked hard almost as if they knew the reward of finishing at the bottom of the East. Maybe it's just coincidence, but it's the 4th year in a row where it's played out in the same way.
  13. Not many thought Quinn would fall to our pick either.
  14. If anything, it's probably a sign of who we won't draft so people will be outraged after our pick only to find out soon enough that Benning and Co made the better pick.
  15. That year NJ picked 1st overall, so hopefully the same luck this year? Maybe NJ should just trade us the 1st overall for our 10th overall and our list on who we would pick at #10.
  16. Looks like the trend continues for another year. And when I made that prediction, Detroit was the bottom Eastern team (or maybe it was NJ and I didn't believe they would give it to them twice so soon) and NJ finished as the bottom Eastern team. Now 9 out of 12 picks out East including all 1st overalls.
  17. Is there a future with his with the Canucks possibly? He will take up a NHL contract spot, which may be more useful towards some NCAA signing or whoever. The other question is what does he want? Does he want to simply be ripping up the AHL? I'm sure he wants to land an NHL gig, so why not give him that opportunity to see if he can find a fit and if not offer an AHL deal if he's interested. With our logjam of forwards, barring some movement, we will likely be sending down some vets that will take his spot. I can see Spooner being a candidate and there's a chance that someone like Gaudette is back in the AHL to start the year simply because of the numbers game and his eligibility to be sent down. So with that said, instead of having Boucher take up more development time, maybe Gadjovich/Lind or whoever can also have a bigger role next season as well.
  18. If he wants to be part of Utica, then for sure I'd keep him. However, like you said, we don't really have plans for him long term, so why not give him an opportunity rather than holding him back? There's a possibility that Spooner may get waived next year and sent to Utica (doubtful a team picks him up at his cap and if so, another bonus for us) if there's a roster crunch and he would very easily replace whatever Boucher did and Spooner would be a much better call up option. I actually see a bigger surprise that people would let Pouliot walk. I get that he wasn't the best NHL player, but he would be of greater value to us IMO if signed and sent to Utica. Assuming he clears (if he doesn't, well people seem happy to let him walk for free anyway), he would add call up depth plus might have more value to be traded once he's cleared waivers. Some team might want to add him as insurance for a playoff run next season or there could be some project swap with another team.
  19. RFA - Brock Boeser (5 years at $6 million) RFA - Markus Granlund (Qualify) RFA - Tyler Motte (2 years at $900,000 NHL) RFA - Josh Leivo (2 years at $1.75 million) RFA - Nikolay Goldobin (Qualify) UFA - Alex Edler (Complicated, don't care much about dollars, just no protection for ED) RFA - Ben Hutton (Qualify) UFA - Luke Schenn (1 year at $1 million) RFA - Derrick Pouliot (Qualify) RFA - Josh Teves (2 years at $925,000 NHL and $162,500 minors) RFA - Brogan Rafferty (2 years at $925,000 NHL and $162,500 minors) RFA - Thatcher Demko (2 years at $1.5 million) Minors/Injured RFA - Yan Pavel Laplante (not sign) UFA - Tom Pyatt (not sign) RFA - Brendan Gaunce (2 years at $800,000 in NHL and minors) UFA - Tanner Kero (1 year at 1 year at $800,000 in NHL and minors) RFA - Reid Boucher (Don't qualify, not sign) UFA - Evan McEneny (not sign)
  20. Would Boucher agree though? He might want to find a team that will give him an NHL contract even if he ends up in the AHL anyway. Or maybe he starts to explore the idea of playing in Europe. He would really need some serious ties to Utica if he wants to stall his career there.
  21. Kinda like the immediate reaction after Pettersson was selected. I doubt Benning would pick Byram to fill a position of need (Hughes, Juolevi, Rathbone, etc) so if he does get picked then Benning and crew genuinely believe he's the better player. With said said, I doubt it happens anyway.
  22. Maybe he wants to show appreciation for the trade we made for Linus.
  23. Impossible to coordinate (although maybe it could be done in Nashville), but it would be funny if there was cheers and chants of Bettman/Gary for about 15 seconds, followed by a massive YOU SUCK! It would be enough time to surprise Bettman and maybe take it in a bit before getting the blow.
  24. Probably wouldn't be a solid to those in Kelowna. But I don't live there, so I'm in favour of this.
  25. Don't think he would go for that cheap, but definitely a target that I would be interested in if being sold low. Montour would be another interesting option if being sold low. Aside from goaltending, I wonder what else they might be looking for.
×
×
  • Create New...