Should the Canucks walk away from Toffoli and Markstrom at the end of this season?

[RU SERIOUS]

On 9/10/2020 at 5:03 PM, MikeBossy said:

Toffoli - I think Benning got what he needed from him which was helping us make the playoffs. Paid a steep price but likely will have to let him walk as i think Boeser offers everything he does and is younger

Tanev - re-sign him but only if the term and $$$ makes sense - long term commitment has risks

Markstrom - this is the tough one as he is our MVP -he's number 1 to sign out of the three in my opinion. 

Virtanen - sign him to a show me what you can do contract maybe? Although I think Vasili Podkolzin might fill any role we hoped Jake could.

 

 

 

Hmmm.....

Toffoli - Maybe if they free cap $

Tanev - yes, he'll be signed at a discount 2-3 years

Marky - Would not be surprised to see him passed for Demko due to cap limits and revenue drop or signed and then traded.

Lazy Jake - Not a snowballs hope in hell he'll be back!    The "Experiment is over" He's toast!  My guess he's headed to Toronto.

Boesser - Also would not be surprised to see him packaged up and traded.  Something tells me - he will not be a Canuck in the long run.

The other Bottom 5 - They can all go - except perhaps Motte - he is a value player.

[wai_lai416]

On 9/11/2020 at 1:55 PM, Canucklehead73 said:

Whatever... you can spin it to your narrative however you like, I did not say anything about trading him the "next day", my opinion is your protect your assets first is all.

 

Simple business imho, if you have a player who is good and you consider him an asset you sign him... if a team needing a goalie comes along with a good offer, there is no reason not to take it. Every player understands without a NTC or a NMC you are possibly getting shipped out at any time. Letting him walk for nothing is not good business unless you have agreed he is not a good player or an asset.

 

Any of our signed players... Any team can come along with a trade offer, it's not considered disloyal to make the trade, or else there would not be any trades...

 

As for "loyalty"... Ask yourself this, why didn't Markstrom sign this year? Why is he saying he wants to play here... but hasn't signed... it's because he wants to see what the offers are, yes from OTHER teams... Markstom is protecting his assets, his perceived prime playing years and wants to get the most he can, Sucks to be you but it's just business. Smart business.

lol good luck spinning that to any of the players agent when signing a contract with this team. there's reason why it doesn't happen in the NHL lol. you think you are smart signing a free agent and then trading him to get free asset instead of letting him walk? u think other gms are dumb and didn't think of it? obviously there's reason why they don't do it.

[Cali Canuck]

Here's the Athletic's take - I can give out guest passes if you are interested.

 

https://theathletic.com/2052980/2020/09/11/who-stays-who-goes-2-0-analyzing-the-canucks-roster-for-the-2020-21-season/

[Junkyard Dog]

Just now, Cali Canuck said:

Here's the Athletic's take - I can give out guest passes if you are interested.

 

https://theathletic.com/2052980/2020/09/11/who-stays-who-goes-2-0-analyzing-the-canucks-roster-for-the-2020-21-season/

Have to pay. Could you post it?

[Cali Canuck]

1 minute ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Have to pay. Could you post it?

https://theathletic.com/gp/1tb7zwi6hp

 

That is a 30 day guest pass

Edited September 13, 2020 by Cali Canuck
new info

[Cali Canuck]

I can't post the whole article.

[Canucklehead73]

23 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

lol good luck spinning that to any of the players agent when signing a contract with this team. there's reason why it doesn't happen in the NHL lol. you think you are smart signing a free agent and then trading him to get free asset instead of letting him walk? u think other gms are dumb and didn't think of it? obviously there's reason why they don't do it.

Well you missing the point I was trying to make, I don't think it's good business to let assets walk as per the OP's question, my personal take on it is to sign you assets and wait for offers on players you are willing to part with. Most GM's are looking to do the same and will publicly say whatever to keep their assets values as high as possible, in case... you guessed it, they get a trade offer.

 

You like to put words into my mouth to make your points... Never said trade him the next day... Never said GM's are dumb, Markstom is hardly a free agent in the context you are using... never said to sign a free agent and trade him for a free asset... that's just you making up BS to agree with your self...

 

How about we just agree to disagree, although your kinda just agreeing with your self because I never said anything along those lines...

 

Peace bud...

 

 

[IBatch]

On 9/9/2020 at 6:39 PM, Canucklehead73 said:

Sure I see what your saying, but IF everyone agrees Marky is a player then signing him to a 5-6mill contract and then trading him for picks/prospect or a positional need while still freeing the cap space. That's what you call asset management.

Anyone who thinks JM is untouchable if he’s signed without a full NMC is naive with Demko “our future number one “ JB own words.   And unless he’s signed with a full NTC he’s a tradeable asset.   Wish I was a fly on the wall but expect his first offer didn’t come with a NMC - and came with a one year full NTC, followed my a limited one with the teams he feels could be in the market for a new goalie over the duration of his contract which I bet was started at around 3 years .   
 

JM probably enjoyed watching Demko play lights out but also knew he was watching his leverage slip away.   JB would be a fool to sign JM for 5.5-6 x 4-5 with a even just the full NTC.   You can bet he will both keep his options available to expose Markstrom at the ED, and to also trade him if and when Demko appears ready.    If JM camp won’t play ball then think JB would be hard pressed not to go an entirely different route.    EP and QHs contracts might also force his hand.   Which means all three of this years big UFAs need to be tradeable assets. 

Edited September 13, 2020 by IBatch

[Mackcanuck]

I can't see us walking away from Markie,

He is 30 yrs old which is prime for a Goalie

I believe we can re-sign him in the $5.5M range

Lets face it Demko's trade value has never been higher than it is right now after his playoff performance

Package Demko with Louii++ in a trade

Sign an inexpensive goalie that Ian Clarke can work his magic with to spell Markie off in the ridiculously tight schedule that will be next season starting Dec.1st

Edited September 13, 2020 by Mackcanuck

[CallAfterLife]

15 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Have to pay. Could you post it?

Quick Summary. 

 

Returning for sure: Pettersson, Hughes, Horvat, Miller, Edler, Myers, Pearson. 

Returning maybe: Boeser, Markstrom

Restricted likely staying: Gaudette, Motte, MacEwan

50/50: Toffoli, Leivo, Stecher, Benn

Wildcards: Eriksson, Ferland

On the block: Virtanen, Sutter, Beagle

Expansion compliance watch: Demko, Domingue

Buyout watch: Roussel

Likely to move on: Tanev, Fantenberg, Baertschi

[IBatch]

15 hours ago, Canucklehead73 said:

Well you missing the point I was trying to make, I don't think it's good business to let assets walk as per the OP's question, my personal take on it is to sign you assets and wait for offers on players you are willing to part with. Most GM's are looking to do the same and will publicly say whatever to keep their assets values as high as possible, in case... you guessed it, they get a trade offer.

 

You like to put words into my mouth to make your points... Never said trade him the next day... Never said GM's are dumb, Markstom is hardly a free agent in the context you are using... never said to sign a free agent and trade him for a free asset... that's just you making up BS to agree with your self...

 

How about we just agree to disagree, although your kinda just agreeing with your self because I never said anything along those lines...

 

Peace bud...

 

 

Maybe I was a little harsh with the “naive” comment above - if Gretzky can get traded out of a powerhouse, in its prime, likely going to win at least 3-5 more cups if the team was kept together in a non-cap world, pre-salary disclosures era - then absolutely anyone can too.   Even with clauses although that does make it very difficult for sure.

 

The team that we all enjoyed 17 playoff games was extremely loveable.   Despite obviously being out gunned they hung in there and believed in themselves - that belief was kept alive by Demko for sure.  JM is  the safe bet and he’s a huge part of their group.   With all that said the team that will really contend for the cup will probably look a lot different and won’t arrive for two more years (no LE, no Luongo).

 

 Completely different support players and defense.   I’m hoping all the signings come in on team friendly deals, and JB is able to work some magic to give mostly the same team another shot while EP and QHs are still on their ELCs, but the team they ice once that is done will for sure have a much different look.  Think PIT back to back finals and then the one that won back to back cups.  Or the first CHI cup compared to the last one.

 

Our future for sure will be in the hands of the remains of our prospects and in the hands of cap restraints to plug the hole.

 

Either way I expect this team to have many shots at it, with the power shifting in the west and in our own division the next decade or is all a window.   That’s exciting.  We won’t be cap heavy like TO and EDM are.   This team will have a cap structure a lot more like St Louis and Vegas.   And JB has a good track record on all his RFA signings to date which is very encouraging.   Personally think JM needs to be on a deal that can be moved.   Both exposed to the draft if needed as well as at most a limited NTC so JB can plan for the future. 
 

Finally:   CHI hasn’t sniffed a cup since their key guys all were given their legacy deals.   Only now have they managed to right the ship.  Took years of cap going up and some bottoming out to keep the dream alive around Toews and Kane.

 

LA .... well not worth talking about them.   Same though.

 

PIT....helps with having that sort of elite talent.

 

TB.   Stamkos is well into his second core.

 

A lot has to go right for us, fortunately we have a very very good base in which to work with.   JB has done a great job, personally never thought this core would have a chance.  A lot was answered this post season as far as what sort of play we can expect.  Having zero delay and producing at that level off the hop is extremely rare.  Only one other time in our history has that happened- Linden/Bure.    

[Nucker 67]

Feel like the Canucks are kind of hooped, in that they've got bad contracts and penalties for the next 2 years, and then Pettersson and Hughes will get huge raises. I'm not sure how they'll be able to re-sign all 3 of the big UFAs. Benning spoke very highly of Tanev and Markstrom, so I think they'll be back, but not sure they can afford Toffoli. Maybe they're waiting to see what they have in Lind and MacEwen at next camp? And if they aren't ready to play on Bo's line, there's always Loui 

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

Anyone who thinks JM is untouchable if he’s signed without a full NMC is naive with Demko “our future number one “ JB own words.   And unless he’s signed with a full NTC he’s a tradeable asset.   Wish I was a fly on the wall but expect his first offer didn’t come with a NMC - and came with a one year full NTC, followed my a limited one with the teams he feels could be in the market for a new goalie over the duration of his contract which I bet was started at around 3 years .   
 

JM probably enjoyed watching Demko play lights out but also knew he was watching his leverage slip away.   JB would be a fool to sign JM for 5.5-6 x 4-5 with a even just the full NTC.   You can bet he will both keep his options available to expose Markstrom at the ED, and to also trade him if and when Demko appears ready.    If JM camp won’t play ball then think JB would be hard pressed not to go an entirely different route.    EP and QHs contracts might also force his hand.   Which means all three of this years big UFAs need to be tradeable assets. 

Here's the flipside. Markstrom has proven himself and is young enough that he's a valuable asset for years yet. Sign him and use Demko as a trade piece. We do have other young options coming up and can give them time having Markstrom for those years. I get that Demko is a fan fave but it may actually be the better option as there's no restriction at all on trade partner and his age and performance means a high value return. Re-signing Markstrom and trading Demko could actually get a high first rounder plus in the draft. Ottawa and Jersey both have three first round picks. Would either being willing to give up a top ten pick for Demko? Or perhaps even a lower first for Demko while taking Louie off our hands who will have $5m remaining remaining on his deal over two years? It is an option.

[King Heffy]

6 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Here's the flipside. Markstrom has proven himself and is young enough that he's a valuable asset for years yet. Sign him and use Demko as a trade piece. We do have other young options coming up and can give them time having Markstrom for those years. I get that Demko is a fan fave but it may actually be the better option as there's no restriction at all on trade partner and his age and performance means a high value return. Re-signing Markstrom and trading Demko could actually get a high first rounder plus in the draft. Ottawa and Jersey both have three first round picks. Would either being willing to give up a top ten pick for Demko? Or perhaps even a lower first for Demko while taking Louie off our hands who will have $5m remaining remaining on his deal over two years? It is an option.

If you can get that kind of return for Demko you do it, even if it's just a late pick coming back in exchange for taking LE off of our hands.  I have my doubts given he'd need to be exposed for the expansion draft.

[Wilbur]

1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:

Feel like the Canucks are kind of hooped, in that they've got bad contracts and penalties for the next 2 years, and then Pettersson and Hughes will get huge raises. I'm not sure how they'll be able to re-sign all 3 of the big UFAs. Benning spoke very highly of Tanev and Markstrom, so I think they'll be back, but not sure they can afford Toffoli. Maybe they're waiting to see what they have in Lind and MacEwen at next camp? And if they aren't ready to play on Bo's line, there's always Loui 

I think you stumbled upon the title for a campy, Canuck-themed 80s style sitcom.

 

"Playing their 3rd game in 4 nights, what will Travis Green decide to do with the roster?  Check it out tonight on There's Always Loui!"

[IBatch]

9 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Here's the flipside. Markstrom has proven himself and is young enough that he's a valuable asset for years yet. Sign him and use Demko as a trade piece. We do have other young options coming up and can give them time having Markstrom for those years. I get that Demko is a fan fave but it may actually be the better option as there's no restriction at all on trade partner and his age and performance means a high value return. Re-signing Markstrom and trading Demko could actually get a high first rounder plus in the draft. Ottawa and Jersey both have three first round picks. Would either being willing to give up a top ten pick for Demko? Or perhaps even a lower first for Demko while taking Louie off our hands who will have $5m remaining remaining on his deal over two years? It is an option.

Absolutely.  Both directions have merit.  Believe JB will sign JM with the idea he can make those choices after next years playoff.   It’s the safe play and the one that give relatively the same team that just gave us 17 games one more shot at it before the first heavy  boom comes down on us cap wise.   The second of course is the third contract ones.   Past this season whomever we will end up going with will end up or core goalie during the second contract period for better or worse.   

[IBatch]

41 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

If you can get that kind of return for Demko you do it, even if it's just a late pick coming back in exchange for taking LE off of our hands.  I have my doubts given he'd need to be exposed for the expansion draft.

I have doubts too - that Demko is going to get a lot of interest quite yet although now at least I think two or three teams would consider him a good gamble and protect him.   A few years back I think it was CAR who traded for I think Darling after a great back-up campaign in CHI - then gave him the reigns too early and he faltered big time.   Goalies don’t usually get much value back given how fickle the position is.    Think JB will trade one of them or expect Seattle to take him JM at the draft.   Just hope that he’s also considering what happened to PIT - Vegas did an excellent job of “taking him of their hands”, they knew they were hard up against the cap and actually got a pick out of it too, even though I’m sure they’d have gone with MAF no matter what.    We will be in the same or worse situation next off-season.   

At the end of the day I’m sure as long as both guys play up to their expectations that quite a few teams would be willing to play ball.   Personally I think the lowest risk AND the highest reward, is actually to go with Demko and a 2-3 million vet 1b like Elliott, Griess or Khodubin.   The real risk isn’t losing Markstrom, it’s not having the funds the following season and thereafter.   My gut says that is how things will play out. 

[King Heffy]

15 minutes ago, IBatch said:

At the end of the day I’m sure as long as both guys play up to their expectations that quite a few teams would be willing to play ball.   Personally I think the lowest risk AND the highest reward, is actually to go with Demko and a 2-3 million vet 1b like Elliott, Griess or Khodubin.   The real risk isn’t losing Markstrom, it’s not having the funds the following season and thereafter.   My gut says that is how things will play out. 

That's my first choice as well.  Marky hasn't been playing at this level for very long and is and will be looking for more term than we should be comfortable giving.

Edited September 13, 2020 by King Heffy

[CallAfterLife]

13 hours ago, King Heffy said:

That's my first choice as well.  Marky hasn't been playing at this level for very long and is and will be looking for more term than we should be comfortable giving.

I'd hate for the Canucks to ruin either Markstrom or Demko the way NJ ruined Schneider. Markstrom especially since he's a lot older and will be signed to big money contract that will be hard to move if his play drops off. NJ had such poor defence and just absolutely overplayed Schneider. I can't help but think that's why he developed hip problems and lost so much of his lateral mobility. Schneider can still track the puck well but he just doesn't have the agility that he once had. 

 

The Canucks don't exactly have the best defence in the league. It's by no means the worst but the team does still rely on good goaltending more times than not. If Benning decides to part with either Markstrom or Demko he better have a good backup signed first. Someone capable of playing at least 30 games in the regular season and a playoff game here and there. 

Edited September 14, 2020 by CallAfterLife

[oldnews]

On 9/13/2020 at 8:51 AM, CallAfterLife said:

Quick Summary. 

 

Returning for sure: Pettersson, Hughes, Horvat, Miller, Edler, Myers, Pearson. 

Returning maybe: Boeser, Markstrom

Restricted likely staying: Gaudette, Motte, MacEwan

50/50: Toffoli, Leivo, Stecher, Benn

Wildcards: Eriksson, Ferland

On the block: Virtanen, Sutter, Beagle

Expansion compliance watch: Demko, Domingue

Buyout watch: Roussel

Likely to move on: Tanev, Fantenberg, Baertschi

Sounds like a canucksmarmy-like take wadr. 

 

Without reading it my guess would be that it comes from a Drance type (entertainment value to some, with very little credibility/actual 'analytical' value).  The kind of junk that emanates from what the writer wants - their personal armchair wishlist - as opposed to paying attention to what management actually tends to do (if people actually hope to anticipate what will be done, the latter has far greater predictive value).

 

On the block = both veteran shutdown centers = a noob's perspective on team-building.  You'd think by now the market might get what management and the coaching staff are doing, or the importance of the bottom six to the young top 6 - but evidently not.

If both those centers are dealt I'll close my account here. That aint gonna happen though.  I'd be adding to, not subtracting from, that center group.  Any move would have to, at the very least, be replaced with a comparable (ie I could see signing a Richardson and possibly moving Sutter - but dealing both Sutter and Beagle is plain loopy, highlight reel fan talk. And Virtanen, likewise, is also nowhere near an obvious choice to move.  The fact Benning expressed that he expects more - I would read that not as much a tip of his hand/expressed intent to dump a player, as it is a message to Virtanen.

 

Returning 'for sure' - to have Pearson in that list is short-sighted - he's nowhere near untouchable/a certainty.  He may wind up being the most moveable cap - and if it comes down to a winger like Pearson, or a 'likely to move on' like Tanev, the choice is simple imo.  Pearson would be out.

Most of that list' is fan talk - not management-think. That's the nature of most of these pseudo-lists - they are fan shopping lists that don't really reflect an ability to think like, or realize what, managment have been/are doing.

50/50 - I'd put Leivo higher than 50 and Benn way below.  Benn imo is one of the most likely not to return.

Buying out Roussel - again, a smarm take imo.  I could see dumping him for modest or no return, but no chance they buy him out.

Putting Fantenburg in the likely to move on list = a blindspot imo - a player the team is extremely likely to want to retain.

Tanev - again - to lean towards 'likely to move on' imo is a bizarre and weak assumption, based on who-knows-what.  Lumping Baertschi with those two - downright odd.  Considering Boeser a 'maybe' to return when he has another year on his current deal - again, some people listen to too many rumours/mistake their own wishlists for likelihood.

 

Overall - I'd rate that a horrible take.

 

Where the team needs to shed - is evident/obvious imo.  Veteran wingers.  Period.  And I'd include Pearson among them, as moveable cap - who can be replaced.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 14, 2020 by oldnews